i cant ping websites only my gateway and internal ips

hye im a newbie in linux, my problem is that i cant ping websites also
my dns
i've tried tools like dig and it works properly, i can ping the dns
from dnstuff.com but not from my linux box.and how do i know that my
linux box can surf thru command line.
please help

On 7 Apr 2006, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article
<(E-Mail Removed) .com>, malo wrote:

>hye im a newbie in linux, my problem is that i cant ping websites also
>my dns

'ping' or ICMP Echo is often abused, and a lot of people are blocking that.

>i've tried tools like dig and it works properly, i can ping the dns
>from dnstuff.com but not from my linux box.

'dig' working means that there is a working connection. That you can ping
from elsewhere but not your own setup means there is a filter/firewall
that is blocking things. This could be on your own systems, or at your
ISP. A TRACERT in windoze, or 'traceroute -I ' in most Linux distributions
should give an indication where 'ping' is being blocked, but it is more
useful to use tools like a web browser or news client to actually use the
net, rather than send packets that otherwise serve no useful purpose..

>and how do i know that my linux box can surf thru command line.

Have you tried it? 'lynx' is a fine browser for this. Start by trying
'lynx http://www.google.com/ ' and see what happens. It would also help
if you identified your Linux distribution and how you are trying to use it.

Old guy

You may also try a traceroute to your destination. Traceroute should
show you the route that is used to get there. First, your computer
tries to query the DNS server for the IP address. If that fails, then
you will get a message like "no route to host". If that does not fail,
then your computer will try to feel out the route to the website,
showing you all hops that your traffic goes across in between your
computer and the destination site. This may help pinpoint a particular
problem for you if your connectivity is there, but limited for some
reason.

traceroute google.com

X

On 13 Apr 2006, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article
<(E-Mail Removed) .com>, X wrote:

[Would you please learn to use a news reader that quotes the article that
you are responding to. Your posting indicates it's responding to my post,
but the text sure doesn't sound that way.]

>You may also try a traceroute to your destination. Traceroute should
>show you the route that is used to get there.

That assumes ICMP isn't being blocked, which might be the problem here.

>First, your computer tries to query the DNS server for the IP address.
>If that fails, then you will get a message like "no route to host".

No, if a DNS lookup fails, the error message will be "unknown host"

[compton ~]$ traceroute www.fooo.como
traceroute: unknown host www.fooo.como
[compton ~]$

If the hostname is resolved, but there is no route to the host from "_this_"
system, traceroute will show this with

[compton ~]$ traceroute 172.16.200.1
traceroute to 172.16.200.1 (172.16.200.1) from 192.0.2.10, 30 hops max,
38 byte packets
traceroute: sendto: Network is unreachable
1 traceroute: wrote 172.16.200.1 38 chars, ret=-1
[compton ~]$

If a router reports back that there is no route (ICMP Type 3 Code 0), there
will be a '!N' after the time from the router that says "you can't get there
from here". See the man page for traceroute.

>This may help pinpoint a particular problem for you if your connectivity
>is there, but limited for some reason.

Yes, "may" is the key word. The *nix standard traceroute uses UDP packets
to ports 33434 and above. The original LBL traceroute (used by most *nix
but not Caldera or SuSE) can also use ICMP echos (pings), which is the
only mode the windoze version knows about. "Normal" network activities
like web browsing, uses TCP and this may not receive the same treatment
as UDP or ICMP.

Old guy