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

Re: Ethernet config



Hi,

Can you ping from the other machines to your linux  machine ?
I see you use the 10base T port, does your hub indicate that the 
netword card is functioning ?

You could also try changing to another 3com509 module. There are 
differences betheen the PNP and non-PNP version of this card.

Kind regards,

Bart van Dommelen
email:dommel@horizon.nl

On 15 Jan 2001, at 20:58, Lorint Hendschel wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I am a 1st time Debian user.  I installed slink on a machine successfully but I
> have problems setting up my home network.  I have a 3com ISA 3C509 card.  When
> I try to ping a machine on my network, ping just sits there with no output
> (except when I ping the Debian machine itself).  When I stop it, I am told that
> all packets were lost.
> 
> lsmod shows that the 3c509 module is loaded.
> 
> Output of 3c5x9 -f:
> 3c5x9 found at 0x300
> Model number 3c509 version 8, base I/O 0x300, IRQ 10, 10baseT port.
> Primary physical address is 00:60:08:4d:c2:9a
> Alternate physical address is 00:60:08:4d:c2:9a
> 
> Output of ifconfig:
> ethO	Link	 encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:60:08:4D:C2:9A
> 	inet addr:192.168.0.3 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
> 	UP BORADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
> 	RX packets:1 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> 	TX packets:364 errors:0 dropped:0 overrruns:0 carrier:0
> 	Collisions:0
> 	Interrupt:10 Base address:0x300
> 
> Output of route:
> localnet  	*	255.255.255.0	U	0	0	4	eth0
> 127.0.0.0	*	255.0.0.0	U	0	0	8	lo
> 
> cat /etc/hosts:
> 127.0.0.1	localhost
> 192.168.0.1	bele_plaece.cottages	bele_plaece # this is a mdk7.2 machine
> 192.168.0.2	tchambe.cottages	tchambe	# this is a Win95 machine
> 192.168.0.3	sierveu.cottage		sierveu # this is the debian machine
> 
> Thanks for any help!
> 	
> -- 
> Lorint HENDSCHEL
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org 
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> 
> 




Reply to: