Hi all, I have a system with dual gigabit ethernet ports. I've assigned them each an ip address, and am using tcpdump and ping to check that they work as expected. They dont.
If I ping, from another box, the address associated with eth1, the traffic appears on eth0. This only happens when I ping from another Linux box - if I ping from one of my Alpha boxes, everything works as expected, i.e. pings addressed to the ipaddress allocated to eth0 appear on eth0, and pings to the ipaddress allocated to eth1 appear on eth1.
I'm running FC3 with kernel 2.6.10 on the dual-eth box, and I've tried pinging from RH7.3, RH9 and FC3 boxes, all with the same result.
It appears from the tcpdump output below, that ls1 is returing the mac address of the eth1 interface *and* the address of the eth0 interface. Is this proper? What am I doing wrong?
Cheers, Terry.
e.g.:
FC3 ping source: [root@dev1 ~]# arp -d ls1 [root@dev1 ~]# arp -d ls1-2 [root@dev1 ~]# ping ls1-2 PING ls1-2.lmb.internal (10.1.0.11) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from ls1-2.lmb.internal (10.1.0.11): icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.322 ms 64 bytes from ls1-2.lmb.internal (10.1.0.11): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.139 ms 64 bytes from ls1-2.lmb.internal (10.1.0.11): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.140 ms 64 bytes from ls1-2.lmb.internal (10.1.0.11): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.142 ms 64 bytes from ls1-2.lmb.internal (10.1.0.11): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.140 ms 64 bytes from ls1-2.lmb.internal (10.1.0.11): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.140 ms
--- ls1-2.lmb.internal ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 received, 0% packet loss, time 5000ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.139/0.170/0.322/0.069 ms, pipe 2 [root@dev1 ~]# arp ls1 Address HWtype HWaddress Flags Mask Iface ls1.lmb.internal (incomplete) eth0 [root@dev1 ~]# arp ls1-2 Address HWtype HWaddress Flags Mask Iface ls1-2.lmb.internal ether 00:E0:81:2B:AA:9A C eth0 [root@dev1 ~]#
dual-net target:
[root@ls1 ~]$ ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:E0:81:2B:AA:9A inet addr:10.1.0.10 Bcast:10.127.255.255 Mask:255.128.0.0 inet6 addr: fe80::2e0:81ff:fe2b:aa9a/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:376742 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:133194 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:179118055 (170.8 MiB) TX bytes:132633288 (126.4 MiB) Interrupt:177
eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:E0:81:2B:AA:9B inet addr:10.1.0.11 Bcast:10.127.255.255 Mask:255.128.0.0 inet6 addr: fe80::2e0:81ff:fe2b:aa9b/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:310052 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:7435 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:64100245 (61.1 MiB) TX bytes:9188440 (8.7 MiB) Interrupt:185
lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:134 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:134 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:9620 (9.3 KiB) TX bytes:9620 (9.3 KiB)
[root@ls1 ~]$ netstat -r Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt Iface 169.254.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 (I dont know where this came from) 10.0.0.0 * 255.128.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.0.0.0 * 255.128.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 default fw.lmb.internal 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 [root@ls1 ~]$
I've also tried fiddling with routes such that: [root@ls1 ~]$ netstat -r Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt Iface ls1-2.lmb.inter * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth1 169.254.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 10.0.0.0 * 255.128.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 default fw.lmb.internal 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
[root@ls1 ~]$ tcpdump -i eth0 host dev1 tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes 18:19:38.378486 arp who-has ls1-2.lmb.internal tell dev1.lmb.internal 18:19:38.386426 arp reply ls1-2.lmb.internal is-at 00:e0:81:2b:aa:9a 18:19:38.378591 IP dev1.lmb.internal > ls1-2.lmb.internal: icmp 64: echo request seq 0 18:19:38.378604 IP ls1-2.lmb.internal > dev1.lmb.internal: icmp 64: echo reply seq 0 18:19:39.379386 IP dev1.lmb.internal > ls1-2.lmb.internal: icmp 64: echo request seq 1 18:19:39.379391 IP ls1-2.lmb.internal > dev1.lmb.internal: icmp 64: echo reply seq 1 18:19:40.379251 IP dev1.lmb.internal > ls1-2.lmb.internal: icmp 64: echo request seq 2 18:19:40.379256 IP ls1-2.lmb.internal > dev1.lmb.internal: icmp 64: echo reply seq 2 18:19:41.379115 IP dev1.lmb.internal > ls1-2.lmb.internal: icmp 64: echo request seq 3 18:19:41.379120 IP ls1-2.lmb.internal > dev1.lmb.internal: icmp 64: echo reply seq 3 18:19:42.378979 IP dev1.lmb.internal > ls1-2.lmb.internal: icmp 64: echo request seq 4 18:19:42.378983 IP ls1-2.lmb.internal > dev1.lmb.internal: icmp 64: echo reply seq 4 18:19:43.378841 IP dev1.lmb.internal > ls1-2.lmb.internal: icmp 64: echo request seq 5 18:19:43.378845 IP ls1-2.lmb.internal > dev1.lmb.internal: icmp 64: echo reply seq 5 18:21:45.179131 arp who-has fw.lmb.internal tell dev1.lmb.internal
15 packets captured 19 packets received by filter 0 packets dropped by kernel [root@ls1 ~]$
[root@ls1 ~]$ tcpdump -i eth1 host dev1 tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode listening on eth1, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes 18:19:38.378495 arp who-has ls1-2.lmb.internal tell dev1.lmb.internal 18:19:38.385104 arp reply ls1-2.lmb.internal is-at 00:e0:81:2b:aa:9b 18:21:45.179132 arp who-has fw.lmb.internal tell dev1.lmb.internal
3 packets captured 3 packets received by filter 0 packets dropped by kernel [root@ls1 ~]$
On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 19:02 +0100, T. Horsnell wrote:
Hi all, I have a system with dual gigabit ethernet ports. I've assigned them each an ip address, and am using tcpdump and ping to check that they work as expected. They dont.
If I ping, from another box, the address associated with eth1, the traffic appears on eth0. This only happens when I ping from another Linux box - if I ping from one of my Alpha boxes, everything works as expected, i.e. pings addressed to the ipaddress allocated to eth0 appear on eth0, and pings to the ipaddress allocated to eth1 appear on eth1.
I'm running FC3 with kernel 2.6.10 on the dual-eth box, and I've tried pinging from RH7.3, RH9 and FC3 boxes, all with the same result.
It appears from the tcpdump output below, that ls1 is returing the mac address of the eth1 interface *and* the address of the eth0 interface. Is this proper? What am I doing wrong?
Cheers, Terry.
You are using 2 interfaces on the same subnet on this machine. This has historically never worked reliably.
If you put one of the interfaces on one subnet and the other on a different subnet I expect it will work better (and as expected).
On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 19:02 +0100, T. Horsnell wrote:
Hi all, I have a system with dual gigabit ethernet ports. I've assigned them each an ip address, and am using tcpdump and ping to check that they work as expected. They dont.
If I ping, from another box, the address associated with eth1, the traffic appears on eth0. This only happens when I ping from another Linux box - if I ping from one of my Alpha boxes, everything works as expected, i.e. pings addressed to the ipaddress allocated to eth0 appear on eth0, and pings to the ipaddress allocated to eth1 appear on eth1.
I'm running FC3 with kernel 2.6.10 on the dual-eth box, and I've tried pinging from RH7.3, RH9 and FC3 boxes, all with the same result.
It appears from the tcpdump output below, that ls1 is returing the mac address of the eth1 interface *and* the address of the eth0 interface. Is this proper? What am I doing wrong?
Cheers, Terry.
You are using 2 interfaces on the same subnet on this machine. This has historically never worked reliably.
If you put one of the interfaces on one subnet and the other on a different subnet I expect it will work better (and as expected).
I see. I think that will require a lot of re-jigging but I'll keep it in mind. For the moment, I've added a pile of static routes to the ls1 host to force the use of eth1 when talking to the subset of machines for which I want to use eth1.
Thanks for your help, Terry.
On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 17:09 +0100, T. Horsnell wrote:
On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 19:02 +0100, T. Horsnell wrote:
Hi all, I have a system with dual gigabit ethernet ports. I've assigned them each an ip address, and am using tcpdump and ping to check that they work as expected. They dont.
If I ping, from another box, the address associated with eth1, the traffic appears on eth0. This only happens when I ping from another Linux box - if I ping from one of my Alpha boxes, everything works as expected, i.e. pings addressed to the ipaddress allocated to eth0 appear on eth0, and pings to the ipaddress allocated to eth1 appear on eth1.
I'm running FC3 with kernel 2.6.10 on the dual-eth box, and I've tried pinging from RH7.3, RH9 and FC3 boxes, all with the same result.
It appears from the tcpdump output below, that ls1 is returing the mac address of the eth1 interface *and* the address of the eth0 interface. Is this proper? What am I doing wrong?
Cheers, Terry.
You are using 2 interfaces on the same subnet on this machine. This has historically never worked reliably.
If you put one of the interfaces on one subnet and the other on a different subnet I expect it will work better (and as expected).
I see. I think that will require a lot of re-jigging but I'll keep it in mind. For the moment, I've added a pile of static routes to the ls1 host to force the use of eth1 when talking to the subset of machines for which I want to use eth1.
Thanks for your help, Terry.
Should not be too hard. It seems all are likely on the same physical network.
You could give a different subnet to the second nic in this machine, then assign alias IPs to the cards in the other machines that were on the new subnet here and set up the naming so that any communication between this machine and those specified hosts used the new subnet, but they still had the existing paths as well.
May be easier than doing the static routing.
Jeff
I just got Fedora Core 4 loaded on my powerbook. So once it boots up initializes the hardware and then the screen goes black and I can't get it to do any thing else. I know that it is in the config for the video but how do I get to a place that I can fix it?
Thanks Bryan
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, Bryan Elliott wrote:
I just got Fedora Core 4 loaded on my powerbook. So once it boots up initializes the hardware and then the screen goes black and I can't get it to do any thing else. I know that it is in the config for the video but how do I get to a place that I can fix it?
Boot it into text mode ('linux 3' at the yaboot prompt) and it shouldn't start X. If that doesn't help, it may be a problem with the framebuffer console...
In the future it would help to have more details on your hardware to aid in diagnosing the problem. Tell us things like what video card and CPU it has. :)
Best, -- Elliot You can accomplish anything you want, so long as you don't care who gets credit for it.
in grub pass in 2 this will sent it into INIT 2 (text mode)
Bryan Elliott wrote:
I just got Fedora Core 4 loaded on my powerbook. So once it boots up initializes the hardware and then the screen goes black and I can't get it to do any thing else. I know that it is in the config for the video but how do I get to a place that I can fix it?
Thanks Bryan
Elliot Lee wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, Bryan Elliott wrote:
I just got Fedora Core 4 loaded on my powerbook. So once it boots up initializes the hardware and then the screen goes black and I can't get it to do any thing else. I know that it is in the config for the video but how do I get to a place that I can fix it?
Boot it into text mode ('linux 3' at the yaboot prompt) and it shouldn't start X. If that doesn't help, it may be a problem with the framebuffer console...
In the future it would help to have more details on your hardware to aid in diagnosing the problem. Tell us things like what video card and CPU it has. :)
Best, -- Elliot You can accomplish anything you want, so long as you don't care who gets credit for it.
It is a powerbook 17 with the following specs
1.67GHz PowerPC G4 processor • 512MB memory • 100GB hard drive • 8x SuperDrive (DVD+-RW/CD-RW) • 10/100/1000 Ethernet
ATI MOBILITY RADEON 9700
Bryan Elliott wrote:
Elliot Lee wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, Bryan Elliott wrote:
I just got Fedora Core 4 loaded on my powerbook. So once it boots up initializes the hardware and then the screen goes black and I can't get it to do any thing else. I know that it is in the config for the video but how do I get to a place that I can fix it?
Boot it into text mode ('linux 3' at the yaboot prompt) and it shouldn't start X. If that doesn't help, it may be a problem with the framebuffer console...
In the future it would help to have more details on your hardware to aid in diagnosing the problem. Tell us things like what video card and CPU it has. :)
Best, -- Elliot You can accomplish anything you want, so long as you don't care who gets credit for it.
It is a powerbook 17 with the following specs
1.67GHz PowerPC G4 processor• 512MB memory • 100GB hard drive • 8x SuperDrive (DVD+-RW/CD-RW) • 10/100/1000 Ethernet
ATI MOBILITY RADEON 9700
So I started it up with Linux 3 and that got me up in text mode so then I ran system-config-display and now I am back at that black screen.
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, Bryan Elliott wrote:
ATI MOBILITY RADEON 9700
The 9600 on a G5 is known to not work with the X server in FC4, so I would guess that your video card just isn't going to work for now.
FC4 updates of xorg-x11 will hopefully fix this in the future. -- Elliot You can accomplish anything you want, so long as you don't care who gets credit for it.
Elliot, I have a similar problem but my hardware is different. Its a Compaq Presario Laptop, Trident Cyber Blade video card, 433 Mhz CPU. The same thing worked with FC3 with out any configuration changes.
Any suggestion's ? Thanks.
Elliot Lee <sopwith@redhat.com To: For users of Fedora Core releases fedora-list@redhat.com > cc: Sent by: Subject: Re: Fedora on Powerbook fedora-list-bounces @redhat.com
06/15/2005 03:53 PM Please respond to For users of Fedora Core releases
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, Bryan Elliott wrote:
ATI MOBILITY RADEON 9700
The 9600 on a G5 is known to not work with the X server in FC4, so I would guess that your video card just isn't going to work for now.
FC4 updates of xorg-x11 will hopefully fix this in the future. -- Elliot You can accomplish anything you want, so long as you don't care who gets credit for it.
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 AdabalaP@schneider.com wrote:
I have a similar problem but my hardware is different. Its a Compaq Presario Laptop, Trident Cyber Blade video card, 433 Mhz CPU. The same thing worked with FC3 with out any configuration changes.
Any suggestion's ? Thanks.
I don't have any specific knowledge on this video card, sorry. Please file a bug against xorg-x11 in bugzilla, reporting the details and the symptoms you see.
Best, -- Elliot You can accomplish anything you want, so long as you don't care who gets credit for it.
-
AdabalaP＠schneider.com -
Bryan Elliott -
Elliot Lee -
Jeff Vian -
Michael Yep -
Terry Horsnell