Re: reinstalling/redoing network
On Mon February 25 2008, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > ii network-manager 0.6.5-3
> > network management framework daemon
> > ii network-manager-gnome 0.6.5-3
> >
>
>
> I would get rid of those two, and also make sure zeroconf is not
> installed as your search above can't show it.
zeroconf not installed.
>
>
> > what is my next step?
> > if I remove all the packages will it take my network down?
> > If so, what do I need to add or make sure I have in what files?
>
>
> You only need to edit one file, /etc/network/interfaces and my guess is
> your setup should just work like this:
>
> ---[ /etc/network/interfaces ]---
>
> allow-hotplug eth0
> iface eth0 inet dhcp
mine looks like:
# cat interfaces
auto lo
iface lo inet loopback
allow-hotplug eth0
iface eth0 inet dhcp
------------
why does it show auto lo and NOT auto lo eth0 ?
>
> ---------------------------------
>
> You can test before changing everything by running 'dhclient eth0' in a
> root terminal (but do shut-down network manager first).If you get a
> working connection then just go ahead with the changes. In case it
> doesn't work you can still do it with a "static" setup:
# dhclient eth0
Listening on LPF/eth0/00:16:76:bc:3f:af
Sending on LPF/eth0/00:16:76:bc:3f:af
Sending on Socket/fallback
option_space_encapsulate: option space agent does not exist, but is
configured.
DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 6
DHCPOFFER from 192.168.10.1
option_space_encapsulate: option space agent does not exist, but is
configured.
DHCPREQUEST on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67
DHCPACK from 192.168.10.1
bound to 192.168.10.4 -- renewal in 38661 seconds.
what is that issue with space agent?
>
> ---[ /etc/network/interfaces ]---
>
> allow-hotplug eth0
> iface eth0 inet static
> address 192.168.10.4
> netmask 255.255.255.0
> broadcast 192.168.10.255
> gateway 192.168.10.1
> dns-nameservers 192.168.10.1
I'll put that in the file now, commented, in case I need it.
--
Paul Cartwright
Registered Linux user # 367800
Registered Ubuntu User #12459
Reply to: