Re: problemas de configuracion de red
En el network interfaces no puedes ponerle a las dos tarjetas de red el mismo gateway, haz una prueba comentando un gateway.
Hay una cosa que no entiendo bien, y es que tienes dos tarjetas de red con el mismo rango ip, para qué ?, si no es mucho preguntar. Yo pondría solo una y la otra en otro rango, para lo que haga falta.
2007/11/14, Mario Ybañez <mybanez@gmail.com>:
hola:
quiero instalar debian testing en mi pc
pero no hay forma de hacer andar la red
(en ubuntu, fedora y mandriva anda todo ok)
aqui mando los datos por si alguien me puede ayudar
mi pc tiene 2 placas de red onboard
es un palaca asus striker extreme
cuyas ip son eth0 192.168.1.2 y eth1
192.168.1.3
el cable teoricamente lo tengo conectado a eth0
ademas tengo un server que me hace la conexion cuya placa tiene como ip
192.168.1.1
========================================
salida de
dmesg | grep eth
forcedeth.c: Reverse Engineered nForce ethernet driver. Version 0.60.
forcedeth: using HIGHDMA
eth0: forcedeth.c: subsystem: 01043:cb84 bound to 0000:00:11.0
forcedeth: using HIGHDMA
eth1: forcedeth.c: subsystem: 01043:cb84 bound to 0000:00:12.0
eth1: no link during initialization.
eth1: no link during initialization.
eth1: no link during initialization.
ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth1: link is not ready
eth0: no IPv6 routers present
eth0: no IPv6 routers present
eth1: no link during initialization.
ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth1: link is not ready
eth1: no link during initialization.
ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth1: link is not ready
eth1: no link during initialization.
ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth1: link is not ready
eth1: no link during initialization.
ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth1: link is not ready
eth0: no IPv6 routers present
//////////// comentario //////////////////////////////
de todo esto supongo que el cable de red esta
conecatdo en eth0
dado que no tengo conexion a internet no piedo instalar el ethtool
baiscamente el problema es que al terminarla configuracion de la red
y quiero hacer un ping a internet o a la placa del server que hace la conexion me dice
Destination Host Unreachable
ahi van los datos
=========================================================
archivo /etc/networks/interface
# This file describes the network interfaces available on your system
# and how to activate them. For more information, see interfaces(5).
# The loopback network interface
auto lo
iface lo inet loopback
# The primary network interface
allow-hotplug eth0
iface eth1 inet static
address 192.168.1.3
netmask
255.255.255.0
gateway 192.168.1.1
auto eth1
iface eth0 inet static
address 192.168.1.2
netmask
255.255.255.0
gateway 192.168.1.1
///////////////comentario////////////////////
tambien probe en agragarle al final
auto eth0 ... y sigue el problema
==========================================================
salida de
ifconfig
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1A:92:9B:EB:E3
inet addr:192.168.1.2 Bcast:
192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: fe80::21a:92ff:fe9b:ebe3/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:87 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:10116 (9.8 KiB)
Interrupt:17 Base address:0x6000
eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1A:92:C2:B6:54
inet addr:
192.168.1.3 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:
255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b)
Interrupt:18 Base address:0x4000
lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:
255.0.0.0
inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
RX packets:131 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:131 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:12574 (12.2 KiB) TX bytes:12574 (12.2 KiB)
================================================================
salida de
route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
localnet *
255.255.255.0
U 0 0 0 eth0
localnet * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
default 192.168.1.1
0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
//////////comentario////////
como el cable esta conectado en eth0 , segun el comentario
hecho mas arriba .... entonces los datos deben salir por eth0
compare con el route de ubuntu que anda bien y esta igual que este
============================================================================
ping 192.168.1.1 que es la ip del server
PING 192.168.1.1 (
192.168.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
From 192.168.1.2 icmp_seq=2 Destination Host Unreachable
From
192.168.1.2 icmp_seq=3 Destination Host Unreachable
From 192.168.1.2 icmp_seq=4 Destination Host Unreachable
From
192.168.1.2 icmp_seq=6 Destination Host Unreachable
From
192.168.1.2 icmp_seq=7 Destination Host Unreachable
From 192.168.1.2 icmp_seq=8 Destination Host Unreachable
--- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics ---
9 packets transmitted, 0 received, +6 errors, 100% packet loss, time 7999ms
, pipe 3
=========================================================
//////////////ping a la ambas palcas de mi pc//////////////
PING 192.168.1.2 (
192.168.1.2) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.1.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.011 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.2: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.008 ms
64 bytes from
192.168.1.2: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.006 ms
---
192.168.1.2 ping statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 1999ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.006/0.008/0.011/0.003 ms
PING
192.168.1.3 (
192.168.1.3) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from
192.168.1.3: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.012 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.3
: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.008 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.3: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.007 ms
64 bytes from
192.168.1.3: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.006 ms
--- 192.168.1.3 ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 2997ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev =
0.006/0.008/0.012/0.003 ms
================================================================
saludos
--
Mario S. Ybañez
Linux User # 398682
--
... "On Debian" ....
Reply to: