Bug 81751

Summary: Remote printer sharing and access documentation
Product: [Retired] Red Hat Linux Reporter: José María Román Faúndez <jmroman>
Component: rhl-sapAssignee: Ed Bailey <ed>
Status: CLOSED DEFERRED QA Contact: Tammy Fox <tammy.c.fox>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 8.0   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2003-02-21 17:14:22 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description José María Román Faúndez 2003-01-13 18:51:44 UTC
Description of problem:

Suggestion for documentation improvement in:

The Official Red Hat Linux System Administration Primer
- Printers and Printing
  - Printer Sharing and Access Control

It is said that RedHat printing systems listens on port 631.  For a remote linux
printer, the "lpd" (LPRng) listens on port 515.

It would be useful to say that by adding in the file /etc/sysconfig/ipchains the
line:

-A input -s 0/0 -d 0/0 515 -p tcp -y -j ACCEPT

port 515 is unblocked throught the firewall (if installed).  I mention this
because RedHat 7.3 and lower don't have the application
redhat-config-securitylevel, and gnome-lokkit does not allow to open extra
ports, which adds a stupid burden on setting up a remote printer.

Thank you for the documentation.  In general it is very usefull for intermediate
users as myself.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
    
Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 1 Ed Bailey 2003-02-21 17:14:22 UTC
Thank you for your feedback.  The next version of the System Administration
Primer will be taking a different approach to documenting print-related issues
in preparation for a more in-depth treatment in a later edition.  Because of
this change, the issue you raise is not directly relevent for the upcoming edition.

Therefore, I am closing your report with a "deferred" status, to reflect the
necessity to keep the issue you raise in mind when work on this chapter continues.