Ping
KMail has been giving me grief lately. Can somebody tell me if this has been received. -- Quote of the login: In any formula, constants (especially those obtained from handbooks) are to be treated as variables.
Re: Ping
On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 19:51 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: KMail has been giving me grief lately. Can somebody tell me if this has been received. Pong.
Re: Ping
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 20:16:16 Phill Coxon wrote: On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 19:51 +1200, Ryan McCoskrie wrote: KMail has been giving me grief lately. Can somebody tell me if this has been received. Pong. [Breaths a sigh of relief] I was wondering if the whole internet had kill filed me (not that I would blame them...) -- Quote of the login: Text processing has made it possible to right-justify any idea, even one which cannot be justified on any other grounds. -- J. Finnegan, USC.
Re: Ping
On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 14:17:46 +1200 Alan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: well Nick I referenced the heading and was n direct reply to Chris's comment why not use the manual. In other words if I knew what was expected e.g. ping in Linux not windows then I would have known to look there to find the command. I have tried very hard to meet everything that is asked but I am beginning to think maybe I should consider tossing the lot in the bucket. right here are the results of pinging 127.0.0.1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ping 127.0.0.1 PING 127.0.0.1 (127.0.0.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.0 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.0 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.0 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.0 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.0 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.0 ms --- 127.0.0.1 ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 packets received, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 0.0/0.0/0.0 ms [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alan Well, that's ok then. The only thing left is to disable your firewall and then attempt to connect. Steve ( as an aside, we're trying to get linux working, so there'll be no need to try *anything* in windows, even if there's an equivalent command ).
Re: Ping
On 2:27 pm 09/05/06 Steve Holdoway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 14:17:46 +1200 Alan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: well Nick I referenced the heading and was n direct reply to Chris's comment why not use the manual. In other words if I knew what was expected e.g. ping in Linux not windows then I would have known to look there to find the command. I know the subject line was intact, but Alan it would be better if you left a little context in so we know exactly what you were replying to. Don't forget some people may read these messages in isolation over a period of days. I have tried very hard to meet everything that is asked but I am beginning to think maybe I should consider tossing the lot in the bucket. right here are the results of pinging 127.0.0.1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ping 127.0.0.1 PING 127.0.0.1 (127.0.0.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.0 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.0 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.0 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.0 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.0 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.0 ms --- 127.0.0.1 ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 packets received, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 0.0/0.0/0.0 ms [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alan Well, that's ok then. The only thing left is to disable your firewall and then attempt to connect. Steve ( as an aside, we're trying to get linux working, so there'll be no need to try *anything* in windows, even if there's an equivalent command ). From a google, it doesn't appear that the line Sep 4 15:14:45 localhost pppd[15159]: sent [LCP TermReq id=0x4 No network protocols running] means that there are no protocols installed on the machine. It means that pppd was unable to bring up a network protocol, not that the machine has some deficiency in its pppd stack or kernel.
Re: Ping
Steve Holdoway wrote: Well, that's ok then. The only thing left is to disable your firewall and then attempt to connect. Steve ( as an aside, we're trying to get linux working, so there'll be no need to try *anything* in windows, even if there's an equivalent command ). I disabled the firewall, the connection was lost with time out waiting for login. I tried it 3 times with same result Alan
Re: Ping
On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 16:40:17 +1200 Alan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steve Holdoway wrote: Well, that's ok then. The only thing left is to disable your firewall and then attempt to connect. Steve ( as an aside, we're trying to get linux working, so there'll be no need to try *anything* in windows, even if there's an equivalent command ). I disabled the firewall, the connection was lost with time out waiting for login. I tried it 3 times with same result Alan Given that you're connecting *and* logging in with the firewall running, I'd say that had something to do with your problem?
Network tip - Scripting with ping
I found myself doing a lot of loops around ping to find machines on the
network
foreach ip (`seq 1 254`)
ping -c 1 192.168.50.${ip}
end
However fping can ping a range of IPs in parallel. Much nicer!
socks:~# fping -a -g 192.168.50.1 192.168.50.6
192.168.50.3
192.168.50.4
192.168.50.6
ICMP Host Unreachable from 192.168.3.1 for ICMP Echo sent to 192.168.50.1
ICMP Host Unreachable from 192.168.3.1 for ICMP Echo sent to 192.168.50.2
ICMP Host Unreachable from 192.168.3.1 for ICMP Echo sent to 192.168.50.5
Re: Network tip - Scripting with ping
Interesting.
When troubleshooting, I might ping a broadcast address for a network (#
number of times) and then check the arp cache for found mappings.
What's the overall use for your script?
Liane.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 16/06/2006 8:36:59 a.m.
I found myself doing a lot of loops around ping to find machines on
the
network
foreach ip (`seq 1 254`)
ping -c 1 192.168.50.${ip}
end
However fping can ping a range of IPs in parallel. Much nicer!
socks:~# fping -a -g 192.168.50.1 192.168.50.6
192.168.50.3
192.168.50.4
192.168.50.6
ICMP Host Unreachable from 192.168.3.1 for ICMP Echo sent to
192.168.50.1
ICMP Host Unreachable from 192.168.3.1 for ICMP Echo sent to
192.168.50.2
ICMP Host Unreachable from 192.168.3.1 for ICMP Echo sent to
192.168.50.5
RE: Network tip - Scripting with ping
From: Liane Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] What's the overall use for your script? Laziness... find all laptops which are powered and connected to the net so I can VNC to them for testing rather than having to walk around the place and find likely canditates
RE: Network tip - Scripting with ping
Yes that's an even better solution... And its faster too -Original Message- From: Jim Cheetham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 16 June 2006 9:38 a.m. To: linux-users@it.canterbury.ac.nz Subject: Re: Network tip - Scripting with ping On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:52:14AM +1200, Craig FALCONER wrote: Laziness... find all laptops which are powered and connected to the net so I can VNC to them for testing rather than having to walk around the place and find likely canditates Untested, but would this help? $ sudo nmap -sP -PA5800,5900 192.168.1.0/24
Re: Network tip - Scripting with ping
This is all good stuff. All I knew before this was ping -b 192.168.1.255 But windows machines don't seem to respond to broadcast pings, rendering it a bit useless. On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:16:52 +1200 Craig FALCONER wrote: Yes that's an even better solution... And its faster too -Original Message- From: Jim Cheetham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 16 June 2006 9:38 a.m. To: linux-users@it.canterbury.ac.nz Subject: Re: Network tip - Scripting with ping On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 08:52:14AM +1200, Craig FALCONER wrote: Laziness... find all laptops which are powered and connected to the net so I can VNC to them for testing rather than having to walk around the place and find likely canditates Untested, but would this help? $ sudo nmap -sP -PA5800,5900 192.168.1.0/24 -- Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DNS and Ping problems at home
I do not know enough about these topics to even ask the right questions. Problem: I cannot ping from my home network to the outside world. (Internal pings work fine) We use IPCop 1.4.1 and a Dlink ADSL modem On my Gentoo server my resolv.conf file looks like this... domain fisher nameserver 192.168.10.1 nameserver 210.55.12.1 nameserver 210.55.12.2 search fisher Anyone have any ideas? Do I have to enter DNS addresses into IPCop? And I do apologise for not using Google for this but as I mentioned above - I don't know what I don't know. Thanks, Rob
Re: DNS and Ping problems at home
Rob .. Fisher, Robert (FXNZ CHC) wrote: I do not know enough about these topics to even ask the right questions. Problem: I cannot ping from my home network to the outside world. (Internal pings work fine) It's possible that IPcop is blocking these - check in some advanced networking section (sorry I have Smoothwall instead) We use IPCop 1.4.1 and a Dlink ADSL modem On my Gentoo server my resolv.conf file looks like this... domain fisher nameserver 192.168.10.1 nameserver 210.55.12.1 nameserver 210.55.12.2 don't you just love ISPs who have DNS servers on the same subnet?! search fisher Anyone have any ideas? Do I have to enter DNS addresses into IPCop? it sure helps IF ipcop is your gateway which almost certainly it is And I do apologise for not using Google for this but as I mentioned above - I don't know what I don't know. Thanks, Rob no worries - you might not know everything but you can work on it Paul -- (E-CAF, 301 Montreal St, Christchurch, NZ) (ph/fax ++64 3 3656 480 : www.e-caf.com)
[OT - ISPs] Re: DNS and Ping problems at home
Paul Swafford wrote: Fisher, Robert (FXNZ CHC) wrote: nameserver 210.55.12.1 nameserver 210.55.12.2 don't you just love ISPs who have DNS servers on the same subnet?! The original point of secondary DNS services for authoratative nameservers was to deal with unreliable machines and networks - because DNS was so critical for humans, the service configuration *required* backup machines (not in a technical sense, just in a management sense). Then, as the Internet grew, along came a heap of new sites, who knew that they had to have two nameservers for their domain names, but didn't really appreciate why ... so they set them both up next to each other on the same LAN. A few of these new sites later realised what the reason was - reliability - but it was too difficult to change the addresses (many new ISPs registered hundreds if not thousands of domains for their customers, each one with the IP address of their DNS servers on them). To cope with that conflict, there are many /32 routes in existance, allowing two otherwise-consecutive IP addresses within the same routing block to actually be on separate LANs - this only really works with multi-homed ISPs, of course, otherwise their upstream connection and/or router acts as the single-point-of-failure they are trying to avoid. *BUT* there may be a more innocuous explanation for those IP addreses - they are quite probably only cache nameservers, not authoratative ones. BIND doesn't really encourage an admin to consider separating these two very different DNS tasks - djbdns on the other hand absolutely requires the admin to do so, because it refuses to have one program doing both tasks. There's nothing inherently wrong (according to Internet management decree) about having two cache nameservers on the same LAN. If there is a network fault, it's only your own network users that are inconvenienced. However, it's most likely that consecutive IP addresses indicates that these are combination cache/authoratative DNS servers, set up wrong and later /32 routed to be almost right. Not a very convincing display of getting-it-right-ness, but common and generally functional. -jim
Re: DNS and Ping problems at home
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 10:44, Fisher, Robert (FXNZ CHC) wrote:
I do not know enough about these topics to even ask the right questions.
Problem:
I cannot ping from my home network to the outside world. (Internal pings
work fine)
We use IPCop 1.4.1 and a Dlink ADSL modem
On my Gentoo server my resolv.conf file looks like this...
domain fisher
nameserver 192.168.10.1
nameserver 210.55.12.1
nameserver 210.55.12.2
search fisher
That looks correct to me, assuming that 192.168.10.1 is the number of the
IPCop machine? and that 210.55.12.[12] are the addresses of your ISP's name
server(s). You should not need to have these numbers in the /etc/resolv.conf
file of any server inside your network, only that of your IPCop.
Check out that the routing is set up correctly.
the command /sbin/route -n should respond with something like this:-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ $ /sbin/route -n
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse Iface
192.168.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 00 eth0
127.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 255.0.0.0 UG0 00 lo
0.0.0.0 192.168.2.3 0.0.0.0 UG0 00 eth0
Make sure that the /etc/conf.d/net.{lo,eth0} files are set up correctly.
btw, Could you mention how old the the Gentoo install is?
In particular what version of baselayout have you got?
They have made huge changes to the scripts which do the network setup
recently. I found that I could not get the static routing correctly either. I
solved the problem by setting up the the machine in internal network to use
the dhcp server in the IPCop box.
Seeing as the ISP has 5 Class C sub-nets they _should_ have their name servers
on different subnets. Cheapskates.
Anyone have any ideas?
Do I have to enter DNS addresses into IPCop?
It all depends on whether you are given a static address by Orcon or whether
they use dhcp to set your address and routing up.
And I do apologise for not using Google for this but as I mentioned above -
I don't know what I don't know.
You might care to read chapters 25 through to 27 in the RUTE book.
http://berty.dyndns.org/rute/node28.html
for a local instance.
--
Sincerely etc.,
Christopher Sawtell
Re: DNS and Ping problems at home
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:51:17 +1300 Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Robert, go route -n and look at where the default route points. [EMAIL PROTECTED] nick $ /sbin/route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse Iface 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 00 eth0 127.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 255.0.0.0 UG0 00 lo 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.254 0.0.0.0 UG0 00 eth0 the default route is the one starting 0.0.0.0, and in mycase it points to 192.168.1.254 (which indeed is an ipcop box) are you just having trouble pinging, or is it all traffic to the net? PS if you are using dhcp then you should not need to adjust your route, or your /etc/resolv.conf. dhcp will alter the routing table to set up a default route (this can be switched off on the dhcp server). It will also supply a list of dns servers and a search list to put in /etc/resolv.conf -- Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: DNS and Ping problems at home
Thanks Nick - so my default gateway looks OK. serva root # route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse Iface 192.168.10.00.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 00 eth0 127.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 255.0.0.0 UG0 00 lo 0.0.0.0 192.168.10.10.0.0.0 UG0 00 eth0 Just pinging seems to be the problem - from all of our computers behind the ipcop box (including the Windows ones) PS, I am still Googling - it seems I am not alone with this problem but I have not found the answer yet. Regards, Robert -Original Message- the default route is the one starting 0.0.0.0, and in mycase it points to 192.168.1.254 (which indeed is an ipcop box) are you just having trouble pinging, or is it all traffic to the net? Regards, Robert -Original Message- From: Paul Swafford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 13 December 2004 10:55 a.m. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: DNS and Ping problems at home it sure helps IF ipcop is your gateway which almost certainly it is Paul -- (E-CAF, 301 Montreal St, Christchurch, NZ) (ph/fax ++64 3 3656 480 : www.e-caf.com) -- Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: DNS and Ping problems at home
-Original Message- From: David Kirk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 13 December 2004 11:52 a.m. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: DNS and Ping problems at home Rob, Is pinging your only problem, or just the first test you tried because you have other problems? Yes pinging seems to be my only problem. Are you trying to ping a name or a number? What happens when you ping ns1.orcon.net.nz? What happens when you ping 210.55.12.1? David, you are onto something. (I think this is where someone will tell me what an idiot I am) I can ping those two addresses but not others.. serva root # ping ns1.orcon.net.nz PING ns1.orcon.net.nz (210.55.12.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from ns1.orcon.net.nz (210.55.12.1): icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=92.1 ms --- ns1.orcon.net.nz ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2002ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 74.622/81.285/92.189/7.773 ms serva root # ping 210.55.12.1 PING 210.55.12.1 (210.55.12.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 210.55.12.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=98.3 ms --- 210.55.12.1 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2003ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 77.361/84.766/98.341/9.614 ms BUT serva root # ping xtra.co.nz PING xtra.co.nz (202.27.184.102) 56(84) bytes of data. --- xtra.co.nz ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 1000ms serva root # ping 202.27.184.27 PING 202.27.184.27 (202.27.184.27) 56(84) bytes of data. --- 202.27.184.27 ping statistics --- 5 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 4001ms serva root # ping gentoo.org PING gentoo.org (204.74.99.100) 56(84) bytes of data. --- gentoo.org ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 2999ms serva root # ping 204.74.99.100 PING 204.74.99.100 (204.74.99.100) 56(84) bytes of data. --- 204.74.99.100 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 1999ms -- Later David Kirk ** Beware the dreaded GMail reply-to header if replying to this message **
RE: DNS and Ping problems at home
-Original Message- From: Christopher Sawtell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 13 December 2004 11:53 a.m. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: DNS and Ping problems at home btw, Could you mention how old the the Gentoo install is? In particular what version of baselayout have you got? Only a few months old and fully up to date. serva root # emerge -s baselayout Searching... [ Results for search key : baselayout ] [ Applications found : 2 ] * sys-apps/baselayout Latest version available: 1.9.4-r6 Latest version installed: 1.9.4-r6 Size of downloaded files: 197 kB Homepage:http://www.gentoo.org/ Description: Base layout for Gentoo Linux (incl. initscripts and sysvinit) License: GPL-2 It all depends on whether you are given a static address by Orcon or whether they use dhcp to set your address and routing up. Yes I was fortunate to get a static IP address from Orcon (that window of opportunity only lasted about a week before Telecom changed the rules)
Re: DNS and Ping problems at home
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:13:57 +1300 Fisher, Robert (FXNZ CHC) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David, you are onto something. (I think this is where someone will tell me what an idiot I am) I can ping those two addresses but not others.. serva root # ping ns1.orcon.net.nz PING ns1.orcon.net.nz (210.55.12.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from ns1.orcon.net.nz (210.55.12.1): icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=92.1 ms --- ns1.orcon.net.nz ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2002ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 74.622/81.285/92.189/7.773 ms serva root # ping 210.55.12.1 PING 210.55.12.1 (210.55.12.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 210.55.12.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=98.3 ms --- 210.55.12.1 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2003ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 77.361/84.766/98.341/9.614 ms BUT serva root # ping xtra.co.nz PING xtra.co.nz (202.27.184.102) 56(84) bytes of data. --- xtra.co.nz ping statistics --- 2 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 1000ms xtra.co.nz does not reply to pings - well they don't from work here. www.ihug.co.nz does, try that. the other possibility is that orcon block ping trafic. -- Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: DNS and Ping problems at home
[snip] rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 77.361/84.766/98.341/9.614 ms BUT serva root # ping xtra.co.nz PING xtra.co.nz (202.27.184.102) 56(84) bytes of data. It's perfectly valid for an isp to tell its firewall to totally ignore pings and not to respond to them. A good one to try that will respond is www.google.com If you can see that one, then name resolution and connectivity is correctly configured at your end, and at least partially working at your isp's [snip] Cheers, Steve -- Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel is switched off
RE: DNS and Ping problems at home
-Original Message- From: Nick Rout [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 13 December 2004 12:19 p.m. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: DNS and Ping problems at home xtra.co.nz does not reply to pings - well they don't from work here. www.ihug.co.nz does, try that. the other possibility is that orcon block ping trafic. Looks like you are onto it too Nick. serva root # ping www.ihug.co.nz PING www.ihug.co.nz (203.109.252.42) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from tig-nz-akl-ns-42.ihug.net (203.109.252.42): icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=78.5 ms 64 bytes from tig-nz-akl-ns-42.ihug.net (203.109.252.42): icmp_seq=2 ttl=58 time=77.6 ms 64 bytes from tig-nz-akl-ns-42.ihug.net (203.109.252.42): icmp_seq=3 ttl=58 time=78.8 ms --- www.ihug.co.nz ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2003ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 77.625/78.321/78.814/0.506 ms
RE: DNS and Ping problems at home
ssh 192.168.10.1 -p 222 that should do the trick :D Tim Doh! I knew that too. Thanks, Rob
RE: DNS and Ping problems at home
(As I might be an idiot I am expecting to get flamed soon - I think I have graduated from newbie.) How do I check to see what default gateway is used. My boxes get their addresses from the IPCop box. Do I need to set a manual gateway in /etc/conf.d/net serva root # ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:08:C7:3C:04:34 inet addr:192.168.10.5 Bcast:192.168.10.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST NOTRAILERS RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:838 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:893 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:87064 (85.0 Kb) TX bytes:84849 (82.8 Kb) Interrupt:20 Base address:0x6000 Regards, Robert -Original Message- From: Paul Swafford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 13 December 2004 10:55 a.m. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: DNS and Ping problems at home it sure helps IF ipcop is your gateway which almost certainly it is Paul -- (E-CAF, 301 Montreal St, Christchurch, NZ) (ph/fax ++64 3 3656 480 : www.e-caf.com)
Re: DNS and Ping problems at home
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:43:34 +1300 Fisher, Robert (FXNZ CHC) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (As I might be an idiot I am expecting to get flamed soon - I think I have graduated from newbie.) How do I check to see what default gateway is used. My boxes get their addresses from the IPCop box. Do I need to set a manual gateway in /etc/conf.d/net serva root # ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:08:C7:3C:04:34 inet addr:192.168.10.5 Bcast:192.168.10.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST NOTRAILERS RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:838 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:893 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:87064 (85.0 Kb) TX bytes:84849 (82.8 Kb) Interrupt:20 Base address:0x6000 Robert, go route -n and look at where the default route points. [EMAIL PROTECTED] nick $ /sbin/route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse Iface 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 00 eth0 127.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 255.0.0.0 UG0 00 lo 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.254 0.0.0.0 UG0 00 eth0 the default route is the one starting 0.0.0.0, and in mycase it points to 192.168.1.254 (which indeed is an ipcop box) are you just having trouble pinging, or is it all traffic to the net? Regards, Robert -Original Message- From: Paul Swafford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 13 December 2004 10:55 a.m. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: DNS and Ping problems at home it sure helps IF ipcop is your gateway which almost certainly it is Paul -- (E-CAF, 301 Montreal St, Christchurch, NZ) (ph/fax ++64 3 3656 480 : www.e-caf.com) -- Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DNS and Ping problems at home
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:07:04 +1300 Fisher, Robert (FXNZ CHC) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Nick - so my default gateway looks OK. serva root # route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse Iface 192.168.10.00.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 00 eth0 127.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 255.0.0.0 UG0 00 lo 0.0.0.0 192.168.10.10.0.0.0 UG0 00 eth0 Just pinging seems to be the problem - from all of our computers behind the ipcop box (including the Windows ones) can the ipcop box ping? ssh into it (port 222 remember) and give it a go. after that test go back to the linux box and do a traceroute: /usr/sbin/traceroute -n www.somewhereorother.com PS, I am still Googling - it seems I am not alone with this problem but I have not found the answer yet. Regards, Robert -- Nick Rout [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DNS and Ping problems at home
Fisher, Robert (FXNZ CHC) wrote: -Original Message- From: Nick Rout [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 13 December 2004 12:16 p.m. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: DNS and Ping problems at home can the ipcop box ping? ssh into it (port 222 remember) and give it a go. serva root # ssh ipcop:222 ssh: ipcop:222: Name or service not known serva root # ssh 192.168.10.1:222 ssh: 192.168.10.1:222: Name or service not known serva root # ssh 192.168.1.1:222 ssh: 192.168.1.1:222: Name or service not known ssh 192.168.10.1 -p 222 that should do the trick :D Tim
RE: DNS and Ping problems at home
A good one to try that will respond is www.google.com If you can see that one, then name resolution and connectivity is correctly configured at your end, and at least partially working at your isp's Well here endeth the lesson. Thanks . serva root # ping www.google.com PING www.google.akadns.net (64.233.189.104) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 64.233.189.104: icmp_seq=1 ttl=232 time=314 ms 64 bytes from 64.233.189.104: icmp_seq=2 ttl=232 time=313 ms --- www.google.akadns.net ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 2 received, 33% packet loss, time 2002ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 313.810/314.087/314.365/0.625 ms
Odd network ping problem
So, while I'm downloading big files on my debain box I'm getting strange network behaviour. The files will pause downloading, and only keep downloading if I'm pinging something. The ping times are included below, and suggest a whole lot of ethernet packet collisions, but ifconfig (also below) tells me that there are no collisions. The times tend to go: 3s,2s,1s,0s,3s,2s,1s,0s,3s,2s,1s,0s The network card and network were working properly...until I upgraded to debian from Red Hat 7.3. Xircom Cardbus 10/100 ethernet PCMCIA card debain unstable kernel 2.4.18 (RH7.3 also used this kernel) If I'm not downloading a big file/files, the ping times are normal (3.3ms av). This doesn't happen at home, where we run a 100Mbs network. Uni runs a 10Mbs network. Could debian be misconfiguring my network card to be running at 100Mbs over a 10Mbs network (or something)? tim http://www.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz/~tnw13 Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur. ifconfig data: eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:10:A4:AB:02:52 inet addr:132.181.15.64 Bcast:132.181.255.255 Mask:255.255.248.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:25814 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:17747 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:35007315 (33.3 MiB) TX bytes:1284616 (1.2 MiB) Interrupt:9 Base address:0x4000 irlan0Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet addr:10.0.1.0 Bcast:10.255.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b) loLink encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:2 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:2 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:244 (244.0 b) TX bytes:244 (244.0 b) Ping data: 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=9 ttl=255 time=4672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=10 ttl=255 time=3672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=11 ttl=255 time=2672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=12 ttl=255 time=1672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=13 ttl=255 time=672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=14 ttl=255 time=1003.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=15 ttl=255 time=11.3 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=16 ttl=255 time=58.4 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=17 ttl=255 time=2069.1 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=18 ttl=255 time=1071.7 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=19 ttl=255 time=1006.2 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=20 ttl=255 time=9.2 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=21 ttl=255 time=3482.7 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=22 ttl=255 time=3000.6 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=23 ttl=255 time=2000.9 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=24 ttl=255 time=1001.0 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=25 ttl=255 time=1004.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=26 ttl=255 time=11.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=27 ttl=255 time=53.7 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=28 ttl=255 time=3002.9 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=29 ttl=255 time=2016.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=30 ttl=255 time=2003.6 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=31 ttl=255 time=1003.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=32 ttl=255 time=16.3 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=33 ttl=255 time=3543.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=34 ttl=255 time=2548.3 ms
Re: Odd network ping problem
It could be having issues autodetecting the network speed, can you lock the card down to 10Mb somehow? jeremyb. From: Tim Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2002/06/04 Tue PM 03:10:35 GMT+12:00 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Odd network ping problem So, while I'm downloading big files on my debain box I'm getting strange network behaviour. The files will pause downloading, and only keep downloading if I'm pinging something. The ping times are included below, and suggest a whole lot of ethernet packet collisions, but ifconfig (also below) tells me that there are no collisions. The times tend to go: 3s,2s,1s,0s,3s,2s,1s,0s,3s,2s,1s,0s The network card and network were working properly...until I upgraded to debian from Red Hat 7.3. Xircom Cardbus 10/100 ethernet PCMCIA card debain unstable kernel 2.4.18 (RH7.3 also used this kernel) If I'm not downloading a big file/files, the ping times are normal (3.3ms av). This doesn't happen at home, where we run a 100Mbs network. Uni runs a 10Mbs network. Could debian be misconfiguring my network card to be running at 100Mbs over a 10Mbs network (or something)? tim http://www.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz/~tnw13 Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur. ifconfig data: eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:10:A4:AB:02:52 inet addr:132.181.15.64 Bcast:132.181.255.255 Mask:255.255.248.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:25814 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:17747 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:35007315 (33.3 MiB) TX bytes:1284616 (1.2 MiB) Interrupt:9 Base address:0x4000 irlan0Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet addr:10.0.1.0 Bcast:10.255.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b) loLink encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:2 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:2 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:244 (244.0 b) TX bytes:244 (244.0 b) Ping data: 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=9 ttl=255 time=4672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=10 ttl=255 time=3672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=11 ttl=255 time=2672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=12 ttl=255 time=1672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=13 ttl=255 time=672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=14 ttl=255 time=1003.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=15 ttl=255 time=11.3 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=16 ttl=255 time=58.4 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=17 ttl=255 time=2069.1 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=18 ttl=255 time=1071.7 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=19 ttl=255 time=1006.2 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=20 ttl=255 time=9.2 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=21 ttl=255 time=3482.7 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=22 ttl=255 time=3000.6 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=23 ttl=255 time=2000.9 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=24 ttl=255 time=1001.0 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=25 ttl=255 time=1004.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=26 ttl=255 time=11.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=27 ttl=255 time=53.7 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=28 ttl=255 time=3002.9 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=29 ttl=255 time=2016.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=30 ttl=255 time=2003.6 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=31 ttl=255 time=1003.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=32 ttl=255 time=16.3 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=33 ttl=255 time=3543.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=34 ttl=255 time=2548.3 ms
Re: Odd network ping problem
It could just be a very busy network with lots of traffic, but then your ifconfig eth0 says Collisions:0. Are you on a switch? Another option would be to see if your card is running in full-duplex mode and the hub/switch is in half duplex (or vise versa) apt-get install nictools-pci there may be a cardbus/xircom diagnosis program in there. On Tue, 2002-06-04 at 15:10, Tim Wright wrote: So, while I'm downloading big files on my debain box I'm getting strange network behaviour. The files will pause downloading, and only keep downloading if I'm pinging something. The ping times are included below, and suggest a whole lot of ethernet packet collisions, but ifconfig (also below) tells me that there are no collisions. The times tend to go: 3s,2s,1s,0s,3s,2s,1s,0s,3s,2s,1s,0s The network card and network were working properly...until I upgraded to debian from Red Hat 7.3. Xircom Cardbus 10/100 ethernet PCMCIA card debain unstable kernel 2.4.18 (RH7.3 also used this kernel) If I'm not downloading a big file/files, the ping times are normal (3.3ms av). This doesn't happen at home, where we run a 100Mbs network. Uni runs a 10Mbs network. Could debian be misconfiguring my network card to be running at 100Mbs over a 10Mbs network (or something)? tim http://www.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz/~tnw13 Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur. ifconfig data: eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:10:A4:AB:02:52 inet addr:132.181.15.64 Bcast:132.181.255.255 Mask:255.255.248.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:25814 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:17747 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:35007315 (33.3 MiB) TX bytes:1284616 (1.2 MiB) Interrupt:9 Base address:0x4000 irlan0Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet addr:10.0.1.0 Bcast:10.255.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b) loLink encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:2 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:2 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:244 (244.0 b) TX bytes:244 (244.0 b) Ping data: 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=9 ttl=255 time=4672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=10 ttl=255 time=3672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=11 ttl=255 time=2672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=12 ttl=255 time=1672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=13 ttl=255 time=672.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=14 ttl=255 time=1003.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=15 ttl=255 time=11.3 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=16 ttl=255 time=58.4 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=17 ttl=255 time=2069.1 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=18 ttl=255 time=1071.7 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=19 ttl=255 time=1006.2 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=20 ttl=255 time=9.2 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=21 ttl=255 time=3482.7 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=22 ttl=255 time=3000.6 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=23 ttl=255 time=2000.9 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=24 ttl=255 time=1001.0 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=25 ttl=255 time=1004.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=26 ttl=255 time=11.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=27 ttl=255 time=53.7 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=28 ttl=255 time=3002.9 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=29 ttl=255 time=2016.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=30 ttl=255 time=2003.6 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=31 ttl=255 time=1003.8 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=32 ttl=255 time=16.3 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=33 ttl=255 time=3543.5 ms 64 bytes from 132.181.9.75: icmp_seq=34 ttl=255 time=2548.3 ms
