9 a.m.
My eth0 interface keeps injecting this IP address
whois 169.254.136.49
[Querying whois.arin.net]
[whois.arin.net]
OrgName: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
OrgID: IANA
Address: 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
City: Marina del Rey
StateProv: CA
PostalCode: 90292-6695
Country: US
I have my modem (ppp0) set to use dhcp and my ethernet card set to
static IP: 192.168.1.101, using network manager, but the SOB keeps
reverting eth0 back to 169.254.136.49. What's with that???
I have no clue, but it's annoying as all hell because I have a local net
with drive mounts to and from my other machines. Looks like some
hand-edits are in order. Best suggestions? Ric
--
================================================
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256 Sign up at: http://counter.li.org/
http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/oar
http://www.wayward4now.net <---down4now too
================================================
9:20 a.m.
On Mon February 18 2008, Ric Moore wrote:
My eth0 interface keeps injecting this IP address
whois 169.254.136.49
[Querying whois.arin.net]
[whois.arin.net]
OrgName: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
OrgID: IANA
Address: 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
City: Marina del Rey
StateProv: CA
PostalCode: 90292-6695
Country: US
I have my modem (ppp0) set to use dhcp and my ethernet card set to
static IP: 192.168.1.101, using network manager, but the SOB keeps
reverting eth0 back to 169.254.136.49. What's with that???
I have no clue, but it's annoying as all hell because I have a local net
with drive mounts to and from my other machines. Looks like some
hand-edits are in order. Best suggestions? Ric
Forget that lookup you did. 169.254........ addresses are link-local addresses
used by zeroconf to assign an address when the device is set to use DHCP to
get an address, but no DHCP server is available.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link-local_address
I can't speak to your setup, but, it sounds like your DHCP server is not
coming up before your card is attempting to be assigned an address.
--
Claude Jones
Brunswick, MD, USA
11:52 a.m.
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 10:20 -0500, Claude Jones wrote:
On Mon February 18 2008, Ric Moore wrote:
> My eth0 interface keeps injecting this IP address
> whois 169.254.136.49
> [Querying whois.arin.net]
> [whois.arin.net]
>
> OrgName: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
> OrgID: IANA
> Address: 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
> City: Marina del Rey
> StateProv: CA
> PostalCode: 90292-6695
> Country: US
>
> I have my modem (ppp0) set to use dhcp and my ethernet card set to
> static IP: 192.168.1.101, using network manager, but the SOB keeps
> reverting eth0 back to 169.254.136.49. What's with that???
>
> I have no clue, but it's annoying as all hell because I have a local net
> with drive mounts to and from my other machines. Looks like some
> hand-edits are in order. Best suggestions? Ric
Forget that lookup you did. 169.254........ addresses are link-local addresses
used by zeroconf to assign an address when the device is set to use DHCP to
get an address, but no DHCP server is available.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link-local_address
I can't speak to your setup, but, it sounds like your DHCP server is not
coming up before your card is attempting to be assigned an address.
NetworkManager doesn't (yet) do static addresses or start-on-boot. If
you want either of those, set
NM_CONTROLLED=no
in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 (or set the appropriate
option in system-config-network).
--
Matthew Saltzman
Clemson University Mathematical Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs
7:12 a.m.
On Mon February 18 2008, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> Forget that lookup you did. 169.254........ addresses are
link-local
> addresses used by zeroconf to assign an address when the device is set to
> use DHCP to get an address, but no DHCP server is available.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link-local_address
>
> I can't speak to your setup, but, it sounds like your DHCP server is not
> coming up before your card is attempting to be assigned an address.
NetworkManager doesn't (yet) do static addresses or start-on-boot. If
you want either of those, set
NM_CONTROLLED=no
in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 (or set the appropriate
option in system-config-network).
yes, that too - good catch, Matthew - I'd forgotten that bit about NM not
handling statics...
--
Claude Jones
Brunswick, MD, USA
12:32 a.m.
On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 08:12 -0500, Claude Jones wrote:
On Mon February 18 2008, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> > Forget that lookup you did. 169.254........ addresses are link-local
> > addresses used by zeroconf to assign an address when the device is set to
> > use DHCP to get an address, but no DHCP server is available.
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link-local_address
> >
> > I can't speak to your setup, but, it sounds like your DHCP server is not
> > coming up before your card is attempting to be assigned an address.
>
> NetworkManager doesn't (yet) do static addresses or start-on-boot. If
> you want either of those, set
>
> NM_CONTROLLED=no
>
> in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 (or set the appropriate
> option in system-config-network).
yes, that too - good catch, Matthew - I'd forgotten that bit about NM not
handling statics...
<giggles inanely> You mean when I check the "static IP" box and then
proceed to fill in the little boxes with addresses, netmask, and all
that stuff, then click to set startup on boot, that it's just <shakes
involuntarily> contrived and it does nothing? Crap, I have nothing
useful lying around to kill myself with.
<chews carpet> I could make a bazainnion dollars coding little apps that
do nothing, but give you an interesting place to enter shit and click on
cute leetle check boxes that makes no difference. At least nothing is
hurt, but my pride. <hugs computer warmly>
Has Bill Gates caught onto this? Don't let him find out, or he'll want
to market it and charge large money and license fees!
<howls with laughter> <shrieks> <eyeball bulging nervous tics>
Well, it WAS sorta fun, I gotta admit. I thought I was actually doing
something, playing with "activating" and "de-activating" for sEvErAl
DaYs. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That wasn't what I wanted to hear.
<BLAM!> <THUD!> ...............................
<wayward4now will now be known as "wayward4then">
--
================================================
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256 Sign up at: http://counter.li.org/
http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/oar
http://www.wayward4now.net <---down4now too
================================================
12:38 p.m.
Matthew Saltzman wrote:
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 10:20 -0500, Claude Jones wrote:
> On Mon February 18 2008, Ric Moore wrote:
>> My eth0 interface keeps injecting this IP address
>> whois 169.254.136.49
>> [Querying whois.arin.net]
>> [whois.arin.net]
>>
>> OrgName: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
>> OrgID: IANA
>> Address: 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
>> City: Marina del Rey
>> StateProv: CA
>> PostalCode: 90292-6695
>> Country: US
>>
>> I have my modem (ppp0) set to use dhcp and my ethernet card set to
>> static IP: 192.168.1.101, using network manager, but the SOB keeps
>> reverting eth0 back to 169.254.136.49. What's with that???
>>
>> I have no clue, but it's annoying as all hell because I have a local net
>> with drive mounts to and from my other machines. Looks like some
>> hand-edits are in order. Best suggestions? Ric
> Forget that lookup you did. 169.254........ addresses are link-local addresses
> used by zeroconf to assign an address when the device is set to use DHCP to
> get an address, but no DHCP server is available.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link-local_address
>
> I can't speak to your setup, but, it sounds like your DHCP server is not
> coming up before your card is attempting to be assigned an address.
NetworkManager doesn't (yet) do static addresses or start-on-boot. If
you want either of those, set
NM_CONTROLLED=no
in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 (or set the appropriate
option in system-config-network).
??? I don't have that in any of my FC[678] machines, and they just have
the IP, NET, and NETMASK set. See ifcfg-lo for an example.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
1:17 p.m.
On Feb 18, 2008 9:20 AM, Claude Jones <cjones(a)levitjames.com> wrote:
On Mon February 18 2008, Ric Moore wrote:
I can't speak to your setup, but, it sounds like your DHCP server is not
coming up before your card is attempting to be assigned an address.
When this happened to me, I was connected directly to my cable modem.
Of course its possible that my ISPs DHCP server went down for a
significant amount of time, but the manager of the network
(NetworkManager) should have made a request at x minutes hours later
again. It never did.
I simply don't use NetworkManager on ethernet connections if I don't
have the time to do troubleshooting.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
2:34 a.m.
El Martes, 19 de Febrero de 2008 20:17, Arthur Pemberton escribió:
I simply don't use NetworkManager on ethernet connections if I don't
have the time to do troubleshooting.
You hit the nail on the head
--
Manuel Arostegui Ramirez.
Electronic Mail is not secure, may not be read every day, and should not
be used for urgent or sensitive issues.
11:57 a.m.
On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 09:34 +0100, Manuel Arostegui Ramirez wrote:
El Martes, 19 de Febrero de 2008 20:17, Arthur Pemberton escribió:
>
> I simply don't use NetworkManager on ethernet connections if I don't
> have the time to do troubleshooting.
You hit the nail on the head
This begs the question, what the hell is it good for? Maybe it would be
better to jerk the thing out by the roots like a Mandrake, kicking and
screaming, and be done with it. I dinked with all of my NFS mounts in my
localnet until I broke everything, on all of my machines, REAL GOOD(tm)!
Then I found the wonky eth0 address on my server. I appreciate being on
the cutting edge, I just abhor getting an ass-beating to something
mission critical like everyday networking.
My first fear was that I was root-kitted via my stinking 56k modem, that
only runs reliably at 28.8, and that someone had way too much time on
their hands! <grimaces> Ric
--
================================================
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256 Sign up at: http://counter.li.org/
http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/oar
http://www.wayward4now.net <---down4now too
================================================
2:54 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Ric Moore wrote:
| On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 09:34 +0100, Manuel Arostegui Ramirez wrote:
|
| This begs the question, what the hell is it good for? Maybe it would be
| better to jerk the thing out by the roots like a Mandrake, kicking and
| screaming, and be done with it. I dinked with all of my NFS mounts in my
| localnet until I broke everything, on all of my machines, REAL GOOD(tm)!
| Then I found the wonky eth0 address on my server. I appreciate being on
| the cutting edge, I just abhor getting an ass-beating to something
| mission critical like everyday networking.
|
| My first fear was that I was root-kitted via my stinking 56k modem, that
| only runs reliably at 28.8, and that someone had way too much time on
| their hands! <grimaces> Ric
Get serious Ric. No one has *that* much time. ;-)
- --
~ David
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
iEYEARECAAYFAkfFzfgACgkQAO0wNI1X4QGahgCgkbpVjh6kZQSnk0bGhNn1JLq5
2a8AoOgc/tCVbSWsm1HaWy2ja/mjt1MP
=f2YZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
9:44 p.m.
On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 15:54 -0500, David Boles wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Ric Moore wrote:
| On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 09:34 +0100, Manuel Arostegui Ramirez wrote:
|
| This begs the question, what the hell is it good for? Maybe it would be
| better to jerk the thing out by the roots like a Mandrake, kicking and
| screaming, and be done with it. I dinked with all of my NFS mounts in my
| localnet until I broke everything, on all of my machines, REAL GOOD(tm)!
| Then I found the wonky eth0 address on my server. I appreciate being on
| the cutting edge, I just abhor getting an ass-beating to something
| mission critical like everyday networking.
|
| My first fear was that I was root-kitted via my stinking 56k modem, that
| only runs reliably at 28.8, and that someone had way too much time on
| their hands! <grimaces> Ric
Get serious Ric. No one has *that* much time. ;-)
Ha! I should hope not! :) Ric
--
================================================
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256 Sign up at: http://counter.li.org/
http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/oar
http://www.wayward4now.net <---down4now too
================================================
8:17 p.m.
On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 12:57 -0500, Ric Moore wrote:
On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 09:34 +0100, Manuel Arostegui Ramirez wrote:
> El Martes, 19 de Febrero de 2008 20:17, Arthur Pemberton escribió:
> >
> > I simply don't use NetworkManager on ethernet connections if I don't
> > have the time to do troubleshooting.
>
> You hit the nail on the head
This begs the question, what the hell is it good for? Maybe it would be
better to jerk the thing out by the roots like a Mandrake, kicking and
screaming, and be done with it. I dinked with all of my NFS mounts in my
localnet until I broke everything, on all of my machines, REAL GOOD(tm)!
Then I found the wonky eth0 address on my server. I appreciate being on
the cutting edge, I just abhor getting an ass-beating to something
mission critical like everyday networking.
It's just fine for managing wireless connections on a laptop or for
connecting to a wire network where DHCP provides the addresses. It
needs some work to be a universal tool for network connectivity, but
that's underway. I've encountered a few irritating little bugs, but the
only showstopper was a driver problem that prevented connection to a
network with a hidden SSID.
My first fear was that I was root-kitted via my stinking 56k modem, that
only runs reliably at 28.8, and that someone had way too much time on
their hands! <grimaces> Ric
--
Matthew Saltzman
Clemson University Mathematical Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs
10:09 p.m.
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:17 PM, Matthew Saltzman <mjs(a)clemson.edu> wrote:
It's just fine for managing wireless connections on a laptop or
for
connecting to a wire network where DHCP provides the addresses.
Very importantly, it can't do both concurrently.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
11:23 p.m.
On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 12:57 -0500, Ric Moore wrote:
My first fear was that I was root-kitted via my stinking 56k modem,
that only runs reliably at 28.8
Going off at a tangent, would you fare better (speed-wise) with a
different modem? Over here, we have what are termed "rural modems"
which are designed to cope better with the harsh conditions of long
phone lines out in the bush. The usual off-the-shelf modems fail
miserably on such lines.
--
(This computer runs FC7, my others run FC4, FC5 & FC6, in case that's
important to the thread.)
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
12:43 a.m.
On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 15:53 +1030, Tim wrote:
On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 12:57 -0500, Ric Moore wrote:
> My first fear was that I was root-kitted via my stinking 56k modem,
> that only runs reliably at 28.8
Going off at a tangent, would you fare better (speed-wise) with a
different modem? Over here, we have what are termed "rural modems"
which are designed to cope better with the harsh conditions of long
phone lines out in the bush. The usual off-the-shelf modems fail
miserably on such lines.
I haven't a clue. The rural phone lines around here are pretty much
terrible and I had to choke the modem down in the init string for
anything to happen, including the login. It's that OR a bunch of old
tired non-USRobotic friendly modems at the ISP with crap for
compression. The modems you're talking about should sell like hot-cakes
over here!
I'm still waiting on our Non-Profit to come up with my Satellite
package, but getting money OUT of a Non-Profit is like squeezing raisins
to get juice. ;) It takes a LOT of squeezing, as well as patience.
;) Ric
--
================================================
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256 Sign up at: http://counter.li.org/
http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/oar
http://www.wayward4now.net <---down4now too
================================================
2:49 a.m.
Tim:
> Going off at a tangent, would you fare better (speed-wise) with a
[and signal reliability-wise]
> different modem? Over here, we have what are termed "rural
modems"
> which are designed to cope better with the harsh conditions of long
> phone lines out in the bush. The usual off-the-shelf modems fail
> miserably on such lines.
Ric Moore:
I haven't a clue. The rural phone lines around here are pretty
much
terrible and I had to choke the modem down in the init string for
anything to happen, including the login. It's that OR a bunch of old
tired non-USRobotic friendly modems at the ISP with crap for
compression. The modems you're talking about should sell like hot-cakes
over here!
Sounds like you might want to see if you can get a modem designed for
bad line conditions, like our rural modems. If you get lots of
disconnects, or retries, they're designed to do that better than the
average modem, to start with.
I'm still waiting on our Non-Profit to come up with my Satellite
package, but getting money OUT of a Non-Profit is like squeezing raisins
to get juice. ;) It takes a LOT of squeezing, as well as patience.
;) Ric
You'll have to get a demo, and get them addicted to it. ;-) That's the
usual computer *user* technique, isn't it?
--
(This computer runs FC7, my others run FC4, FC5 & FC6, in case that's
important to the thread.)
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
11:41 a.m.
On Feb 18, 2008 9:00 AM, Ric Moore <wayward4now(a)gmail.com> wrote:
My eth0 interface keeps injecting this IP address
whois 169.254.136.49
[Querying whois.arin.net]
[whois.arin.net]
OrgName: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
OrgID: IANA
Address: 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
City: Marina del Rey
StateProv: CA
PostalCode: 90292-6695
Country: US
I have my modem (ppp0) set to use dhcp and my ethernet card set to
static IP: 192.168.1.101, using network manager, but the SOB keeps
reverting eth0 back to 169.254.136.49. What's with that???
I have no clue, but it's annoying as all hell because I have a local net
with drive mounts to and from my other machines. Looks like some
hand-edits are in order. Best suggestions? Ric
I don't know if this is still the case, but I remember reading something
about NetworkManager not really handling static Ip setups very well. Can you
setup for DHCP server to give you the IP you want? This is what I do with my
Netgear router. I have IPs 192.168.0.2-10 reserved for this and set the
router to recognize my MAC address and always give me IP 192.168.0.2. All
other users get 192.168.0.11 or higher.
Richard
1:14 p.m.
On Feb 18, 2008 9:00 AM, Ric Moore <wayward4now(a)gmail.com> wrote:
My eth0 interface keeps injecting this IP address
whois 169.254.136.49
[Querying whois.arin.net]
[whois.arin.net]
OrgName: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
OrgID: IANA
Address: 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
City: Marina del Rey
StateProv: CA
PostalCode: 90292-6695
Country: US
I have my modem (ppp0) set to use dhcp and my ethernet card set to
static IP: 192.168.1.101, using network manager, but the SOB keeps
reverting eth0 back to 169.254.136.49. What's with that???
I have no clue, but it's annoying as all hell because I have a local net
with drive mounts to and from my other machines. Looks like some
hand-edits are in order. Best suggestions? Ric
I had this happen to me in FC6. It happened at a very crucial time for
me, and I was so pissed I turned it off and never bothered with it
again -- so it's partly my fault as I didn't file a bug.
It basically ignored the IP it got via DHCP, and set it's own
169.*.*.* IP, quite possibly exactly the one you mentioned. There were
no associated error messages, I only noticed this was what was
happening through useful messages to /var/log/messages.
--
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )
10:39 p.m.
On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 13:14 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Feb 18, 2008 9:00 AM, Ric Moore <wayward4now(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> My eth0 interface keeps injecting this IP address
> whois 169.254.136.49
> [Querying whois.arin.net]
> [whois.arin.net]
>
> OrgName: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
> OrgID: IANA
> Address: 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
> City: Marina del Rey
> StateProv: CA
> PostalCode: 90292-6695
> Country: US
>
> I have my modem (ppp0) set to use dhcp and my ethernet card set to
> static IP: 192.168.1.101, using network manager, but the SOB keeps
> reverting eth0 back to 169.254.136.49. What's with that???
>
> I have no clue, but it's annoying as all hell because I have a local net
> with drive mounts to and from my other machines. Looks like some
> hand-edits are in order. Best suggestions? Ric
I had this happen to me in FC6. It happened at a very crucial time for
me, and I was so pissed I turned it off and never bothered with it
again -- so it's partly my fault as I didn't file a bug.
It basically ignored the IP it got via DHCP, and set it's own
169.*.*.* IP, quite possibly exactly the one you mentioned. There were
no associated error messages, I only noticed this was what was
happening through useful messages to /var/log/messages.
I have the modem set up to use DHCP, but eth0 was supposed to be static
as are the rest of the machines on my localnet all connected to a little
hub. I still have no clue why it shifted gears like that. Like you,
first looking at the logfile then ifconfig kept showing the bogus IP
address. Thanks, Ric
--
================================================
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256 Sign up at: http://counter.li.org/
http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/oar
http://www.wayward4now.net <---down4now too
================================================
5902
days inactive
5912
days old
18 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
Arthur Pemberton -
Bill Davidsen -
Claude Jones -
David -
Manuel Aróstegui -
Matthew Saltzman -
Ric Moore -
Richard Shaw -
Tim