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

Re: networking problem during install



On Tue, Aug 28, 2001 at 11:33:04PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > Okay.  I just tried again with potato install disks, from the 'compact'
> > series.  Same problems as with slink.  Great sadness and woe.
> > 
> > A recap:
> >     - ifconfig reports TX packets, but no RX packets.
> >     - network card works in other boxes
> >     - LAN allows two other boxes to network without problems.  Swapping
> >         cables has no effect; the problem is probably not in the ethernet
> >         hardware.
> >     - curiously enough, if I ping from the problem box to a good box
> >         (2.2 install disks have ping! yay!), I don't see any RX packets
> >         on the good box, though I see TX packets on the bad box.  (If I
> >         ping from the good box to the bad box, I see TX packets on the
> >         good box, and nothing at all on the bad box, as I expected.
> >         In both cases, I see network activity on the hub coming from
> >         the box running ping, and nothing from the target box.)
> > 
> > This has me greatly confused.  If the problem is just that the bad
> > box can't receive packets, then why doesn't a good box report recieved
> > packets when the bad box pings it?  The hub is reporting packets going
> > out, so the card on the bad box is sending something out there, but an
> > otherwise good box doesn't see it.  
> > 
> > I don't get it... it's as if there's two different networks here, one
> > for the bad box and one for everything else.  That's nuts, since apart
> > from the host IP (.7 instead of .2) everything in ifconfig/route is the
> > same in the bad box as it is in this box, which is networking nicely.
> > 
> > Maybe it'll make sense in the morning.  Always, TIA.
> 
> I don't know if you've posted your config settings from the bad box
> itself.  What's ifconfig and route output for this puppy?

ifconfig:
eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:A0:78:58:F0:1D  
          inet addr:10.1.1.7  Bcast:10.255.255.255  Mask:255.0.0.0
          UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:732 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 
          Interrupt:9 Base address:0xfc00 

lo        Link encap:Local Loopback  
          inet addr:127.0.0.1  Mask:255.0.0.0
          UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:3924  Metric:1
          RX packets:381 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:381 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 

route -n:
Kernel IP routing table
Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
10.0.0.0        0.0.0.0         255.0.0.0       U     0      0        0 eth0
0.0.0.0         10.1.1.1        0.0.0.0         UG    0      0        0 eth0


Which is essentially the same as the box I'm writing this on, except
that this good box has an IP of .2, and has several eth0 RX packets
(and a couple dozen errors, but the number doesn't increase with testing).
So similar, in fact, that I cut'n'pasted this box's output, and manually
changed the numbers (a thing I wouldn't have to do if I had a network...)
I didn't have to change the route output at all.

> Any firewalling going on?

I've disabled all firewalling when testing (after unplugging the DSL line.)

> Nothing funky with the hub itself?  Have you tried bouncing it?

Tried bouncing it.  No change.  Swapping cables doesn't help, either.
I'll try to get my hands on a crossover cable, just to cover all bases.

> Um...do I know you?

You sound familiar.  Qatar, 1964?


-- 
Bob Galloway                  A single day of
                              Experience is worth a
                              Decade of Usenet.



Reply to: