On 2019-07-14, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > 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.
Oh you do have to care - a typical crossover cable often won't work for gigabit interfaces :) >> > drogo# ifconfig re0 10.100.200.1/24 # oops forgot up "up" is done implicitly when setting an address. (there has been some suggestion of changing that, there are some situations where you want to do things between setting the address and bringing it up, but it hasn't happened yet). >> > 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? No idea what is going on but I don't expect (and don't see) a difference between using "up" or not when configuring an address, I manually configure addresses on ethernet interfaces and vlans quite often and don't see any problems.
