[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ifconfig doesn't report Promiscuous interfaces



Am 16.3.2001, 20:32 (-0500) schrieb S.Salman Ahmed:

> 
> Isn't ifconfig supposed to report if a network interface is in
> Promiscuous mode ? I thought it was.

Hi,
I have the same behaviour on my machine. ifconfig doesn't show the
PROMISC-mode of eth0. Whem I'm using 'iproute' instead of ifconfig, the
PROMISC-mode is reported correctly:

--------------------------------------------------------------
Yogiland:/home/yogi# dpkg -l|grep iproute
ii  iproute        20001007-1     Professional tools to control the
networking

Yogiland:/home/yogi# dpkg -l|grep net-tools
ii  net-tools      1.58-2         The NET-3 networking toolkit

Yogiland:/home/yogi# ifconfig eth0
eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 52:54:00:EC:BF:4F
          inet addr:192.168.12.1  Bcast:192.168.12.255  Mask:255.255.255.0
          UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          RX packets:950 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:950 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
          RX bytes:90486 (88.3 Kb)  TX bytes:91298 (89.1 Kb)
          Interrupt:5 Base address:0xe000
 
Yogiland:/home/yogi# ip link show eth0
3: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,PROMISC,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen
100
    link/ether 52:54:00:ec:bf:4f brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
--------------------------------------------------------------

Running Debian 2.1, Kernel 2.4.0 and 2.4.1, not compromised (cause its
running offline... ;-)

Marcus
-- 
                             _\|/_
                             (o o)
>-------------------------oOO-(_)-OOo--------------------------<
| Marcus Beranek                                  Cranachstr.7 |
|                                            40235 Duesseldorf |
| Email: marcus@beranek.de                                     |
| WWW:   http://www.beranek.de                                 |
>--------------------------------------------------------------<





Reply to: