Roderick writes: > > On Sun, 14 Jul 2019, [email protected] wrote: > > > I also string a cable between their ethernet ports for maximum speed > > Was it a crossover cable?
I have no idea how long it's been since I had to care. I *did* mention that the physical setup already worked and was subsequently made to work. There is zero chance of hardware being at issue (almost -ed). > > drogo# pkill -f re0 > > Do you have somewhere a program called re0 running?! 43832 dhclient: re0 76984 dhclient: re0 [priv] > > drogo# ifconfig re0 10.100.200.1/24 > > Why the name of a whole net for just an address of an interface? I don't know what this means. How else should I give an ethernet device which otherwise has no network configured at all a full address? Todd C. Miller writes: > On Sun, 14 Jul 2019 12:35:32 +0300, [email protected] wrote: > > drogo# pkill -f re0 > > I'm assuming this is to kill off any dhclient for re0? Indeed. It's a laptop so it's sanest to have all devices try dhcp so I can usually just plug in and have things work. The 3-odd seconds extra boot time is irrelevant. > > drogo# ifconfig re0 10.100.200.1/24 # oops forgot up > > drogo# ping 10.100.200.2 > > PING 10.100.200.2 (10.100.200.2): 56 data bytes > > ping: sendmsg: Host is down > > ping: wrote 10.100.200.2 64 chars, ret=-1 > > I'm not sure what you are tying to do here. You haven't configured > re0 with an IP address. I suspect you really wanted to run "dhclient > re0" instead. The problem is that the line should have included 'up', as it did later on when the correct process was followed start to finish. I don't know what you mean by "haven't configured re0 with an IP address". What else is 10.100.200.1/24? Why does the absense of up in that command screw up that attempt and subsequent attempts (see my original post for the full transcript), and is there a less crude recovery mechanism than sh /etc/netstart? Matthew
