On Jun 12, Tony Firecloud wrote:
>
> I was using an incorrect patch cord; now i have store-bought
> crossover cables; i'm still not getting something. The below
> paste is self-expanatory:
> (The hosts are directly cabled NIC to NIC with a crossover cable)
>
> From host I
> makua:~# ifconfig
> eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:10:5A:1B:F3:6B
> inet addr:10.0.0.1 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:3 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
> collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
> RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:180 (180.0 b)
> Interrupt:10 Base address:0xf480
>
thats a darn strange netmask for a local network. You are supporting 2^{24}
(16.7 million) hosts in the same 'local' neighbourhood.
try 'ifconfig eth0 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 up' instead.
> From host II
> firecloud:~# ifconfig
> eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:10:A4:E8:13:8F
> inet addr:10.0.0.3 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:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
> collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
> RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b)
> Interrupt:11 Base address:0x4000
>
same here but instead
'ifconfig eth0 10.0.0.3 netmask 255.255.255.0'.
Just a side note worth mentioning. The 10.x.x.x region is really only worth
it for *large* multi-site networks. 172.16.x.x->172.32.x.x is suitable for
'medium' networks and 192.168.x.x is great for home networks, and other small
scale stuff. There is not real advantage/disadvantages between the lot
however the 'convention' for home stuff is 192.168.x.x, in my experience
lusers into quake multiplayer use 10.x.x.x :) And that can only be a bad
thing, 0verkill is much more suitable.
Anyway this should not be effecting your network anyway. I feel a nastier
problem is at foot, or something :)
Probably something wrong with the 'medium' settings. Both are set to _half_
duplex 10Mbps (or 100Mbps) speed right?
The only other idea I would have is that you have some voodoo
iptables/ipchains ruleset on one of the machines preventing the packets
actually transmitting/receiving.......
good luck
Alex
--
________________________
< Above all else -- sky. >
------------------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||
msg08309/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
