Re: Rudimentary network questions.
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way, someone said...
> I've read through the "Networking-HOWTO" several times and much of it
> still baffles me. What I'm trying to do is connect two computers, using
> one as a print server for my windows only printer. One thing I'm
> confused about is the assignment of 127.0.0.0 and 127.0.0.1
> I've read that 127.0.0.1 is the loopback route.
That's correct; if one service needs to contact another on the same
computer it's possible to do this through the loopback device. Many
things (ie NFS) won't work if it's not set up.
For that matter, networking in general won't work :)
> 127.0.0.0 for what I can gather is the "top of the stack." I can ping
> both successfully on my computer. What I'm confused about is which to
> set my eth0 to?
You set eth0 to neither; 127.0.0.1 is reserved for the device lo (the
loopback network device)
> In /etc/init.d/network I have this,
> ifconfig lo 127.0.0.1
> route add -net 127.0.0.0
>
> /etc/hosts is
> 127.0.0.1 xyf localhost
>
> /etc/networks
> localnet 127.0.0.0
All of that is correct.
>
> When I run,
> ~# netstat -nr
> Kernel IP routing table
> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt
> Iface
> 127.0.0.1 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 3584 0 0
> lo
> 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 3584 0 0
> lo
? Only the first should be there. The other is redundant.
> This is showing that I have two loopback routes. Is this correct?
Yes, you're reading that right.
> When I assign a route to my nic do I set it at 127.0.0.1 or 127.0.0.0
> or neither?
Neither.
> The computer that I'm going to connect to do I assign it 127.0.0.2?
AFAIK not a good idea.
> I know you can assign it "anything" (since this won't be connected to
> the net) but is this following convention?
You have the right idea, but are using the wrong numbers. There are a
large number of IP#s (literally millions!) that have been set aside by the
internet RFCs, IIRC RFC1918 lists them.
These are the IP#s I'm currently using for my private network:
192.168.0.1
192.168.0.2
192.168.0.3
192.168.0.10-192.168.0.254
This is essentially the range 192.168.0.0-192.168.0.254. Since they've
been set aside for private use, you can use them every bit as easily as I
do without having to worry about whether or not they'll conflict with
someone else. I strongly recommend that you use this range; it makes so
many things much easier to debug :)
> The other thing I'm having trouble with is the computer I wish to use as
> a server is a 386 with Windows 3.11 on it.
Win3.11? As a server?
> It came with a card and at one time was on a network. There is a pop
> up when it boots that says, "The NetWare Shell has not been loaded.
> All network functions will me disabled. ...load the software and
> restart." Of course I don't have the Novell NetWare disk to do that.
> Can I set that box up from my Slink side in some way?
As in make the slink system a NetWare compatible server?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Brutsche pbrutsch@creighton.edu
"There are two things that are infinite; Human stupidity and the
universe. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
Reply to: