Um.....of course I wrote the first line of that backwards......I meant "as long as you leave the front office workstations offline you are fine."
At 05:26 AM 12/6/2003 -0600, you wrote: >Have never seen anything exactly like what your describing. >However, Unless I am reading your posts poorly, it sounds like you are >saying that as long as you leave the front office workstations offline you >have issues. >How many front office workstations are there? Is it feasible to check >there ip settings one at a time manually? Sounds a LOT like someone has >statically assigned an ip address on a machine rather than letting the >dhcp server take care of it. If they have used an ip address that is >already assigned elsewhere then that can cause issues .......if they have >assigned an ip address that is already assigned to an ethernet port on a >router then that can cause LOTS of problems. Having this issue come up >after the network builds up a certain amount of load may simply mean that >someone finally booted this screwed up workstation that has a errant ip >address statically assigned. Also, do any of your computers have multiple >nics? >I've heard of situations similar to what you are describing, when a >computer has multiple nics......with each nic assigned appropriately for >the settings needed to allow it to participate in different >vlans.....with routing turned on ......and those the computer starts >advertising itself as a router would....the other routers begin injecting >this information into their routing tables dynamically....and >poof........and to make the system even more difficult narrow down, >microsoft has it set up so that only the gateway used on the last nic >activated will be used, so if someone is troubleshooting and act/deact the >multiple nics in a given machine.....different gateways will become active >at any given time thus the symptoms are consistent. >Hope this gives you some ideas, >Cleve > > > >At 10:43 PM 12/5/2003 -0600, you wrote: > >>Last night, the network was humming along just fine. >> >>This morning, It appears that once the network got loaded down somewhat >>and started doing the freakin' thing again. >> >>Except, this one situation was slightly different than yesterdays. >> >>Using EtherApe, the network (from an ip viewpoint) would grow and shrink >>as would the ability >>to hit certain machines via tcpip. Segments would join and leave the >>network at random intervals. >> >>EtherApe also allows monitoring at the ethernet level. From that >>perpective, the network >>extents were complete and static.. IPX packets could bounce around all >>regions with no problem or loss.. >> >>As far as the machines go, some routers (but not all) would do the low >>cpu utilization thing, then jump to nearly 100% utilization..and then go >>back down. >> >>We isolated some hardware - just enough for the plant to run; the front >>office >>is disconnected except for the servers. The network is stable now (at >>least the half of it that is still juiced) >> >>Weird that it would do that ...All of the dark routers excpet for one had >>a solid and correct configuration. The one bad apple consistantly >>misreported status with what was configured. With the bad one dark, the >>other ones freaked as well (even after cold starts) until their power was >>extenguished as well.. >> >>Waiting on spares ... to tide over until the network is replaced with a >>new one soon. >> >>I'd like to know if anyone else has seen anything remotely like this.... >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>General mailing list >>[email protected] >>http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net > > >_______________________________________________ >General mailing list >[email protected] >http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
