Joe Taylor wrote:
My earlier problem with dropped multicast packets seems to be fixed in
MAP65 v0.8. However, when running the Linrad-MAP65 combination on two
separate computers I still have some network-related problems. Perhaps
someone on this list who knows much more than I about networking can help.
My computer network looks like this:
ADSL 10 Mb/s --> Computer_A
DSL --> Modem --> Ethernet --> Computer_B
Three computers are connected to a 10 Mb/s Ethernet Hub.
Have you considered replacing the hub with a 100 Mbps full-duplex
Ethernet switch? There are many advantages in this over a hub.
my XYL's machine. Computer_B runs Windows 2000 Pro, and Computer_C runs
Linux (presently the Kubuntu 6.06 distribution). In addition to the
connections of all three machines to the hub, a crossover cable makes a
direct 100 Mb/s connection between computers B and C.
The ethernet interfaces on B and C appear to be configured correctly.
On Linux they appear as eth0 and eth1 (occasionally they boot up as eth0
and eth2, I don't know why???).
This is configurable, generally, and should be fixed if you intend to
use interface based static routes. Check here for more info on iftab
Connections to the Hub are assigned
dynamic IP addresses;
I assume these addresses are in the 192.168.1.x range?
I assigned hard-coded addresses 192.168.10.12 and
192.168.10.13 for the direct inter-machine connection
between B and C.
I can use the 100 Mb/s direct line for many purposes. I can ping over
it in either direction; I can ssh into Linux from Windows; I can use
Cygwin/X (as described above) to display Linux X programs on the Windows
However, I cannot seem to persuade Windows 2000 Pro to accept multicast
packets over the direct line. When I run Linrad on computer C and MAP65
on B, the multicast traffic is always received over the slow line,
through the Hub. This uses most of the 10 Mb/s link's bandwidth, and my
wife can't read her email when I'm on the air. This is NOT GOOD.
An Ethernet switch would eliminate this, as traffic passing between two
machines (B-C) does not use any bandwidth, nor is it seen, by any other
machines. Internet access by machine A would be unaffected by a transfer
occurring between machines B and C. Machine A would not see the traffic,
nor would there be any contention for bandwidth on it's connection
because of the B-C traffic.
By default the multicast traffic generated by Computer_C goes to eth0.
I can use the Linux "route" command to explicitly tell the system to use
# route add -net 220.127.116.11 netmask 18.104.22.168 dev eth0
This works fine (but of course, still sends the heavy multicast traffic
through the hub). If I remove this routing instruction and instead enter
# route add -net 22.214.171.124 netmask 126.96.36.199 dev eth1
the multicast data are not received by MAP65 running on the other machine.
If I unplug the crossover cable from the Windows machine and instead
plug it into a laptop running Win/XP, the laptop receives the multicast
packets without a problem.
Thus, it would seem that the problem must be in my setup of the Win2k
machine -- the one with two ethernet interfaces. Can anyone shed any
light on this situation for me?
Would there be sufficient bandwidth in a 100baseTx connection (100 Mbps
full-duplex) to handle both of the networking streams, i.e. the hub and
the direct stream? If so, replacing the inefficient hub with a faster
switch, thus confining network traffic to only the ports of the involved
machines, might solve the issue. This might allow you to eliminate the
direct connection between machines B and C.
As to W2k the unicast and multicast routes are handled in separate
tables, check here for more info:
Hope some of this is of some use :)
Rick Kunath, k9ao
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list <email@example.com>.
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>