Re: [Samba] samba resolves wrong wins ip address
Hallo John Russell, berlioz:/home/jorussel# arp -a bxb2-bb-hsrp.cisco.com (161.44.79.1) at 00:00:0C:07:AC:01 [ether] on eth0 ? (161.44.79.176) at 00:02:8A:36:63:87 [ether] on eth0 ? (161.44.79.220) at 00:0C:29:46:EE:9A [ether] on eth0 berlioz:/home/jorussel# nmblookup jorussel-w2ks --vmware guest name querying jorussel-w2ks on 161.44.79.255 161.44.79.220 jorussel-w2ks00 berlioz:/home/jorussel# nmblookup mendelssohn --vmware host and machine 1 querying mendelssohn on 161.44.79.255 161.44.79.176 mendelssohn00 -- this is the CORRECT address. berlioz:/home/jorussel# ping mendelssohn PING mendelssohn (192.168.35.1) 56(84) bytes of data. -- this is the WRONG address AAGGH!! So what is ping doing? What happend's (ping mendelson) when you do the following ? remove wins entry in nsswitch.conf hosts: files dns When you use dhcp then you should dynamically update your DNS ! Greetings Thomas -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] samba resolves wrong wins ip address
Hello all, This has been making me crazy for a while, but it seems like a really easy fix. I just can't figure out what it is. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated. I have two Linux machines existing on a mostly MS network and have samba running well on each. However, one machine resolves the wrong ip address of the other machine. Here's the setup. Machine 1: Laptop uses DHCP to get dynamic address uses samba-3.0.1 (wins server = a.b.c.d) to register name/ip address with WINS server so MS and samba machines on the network can resolve its hostname to its dynamic address. also runs vmware in bridged networking mode (read on) Machine 2: Server has static ip address uses samba-2.2.7a (wins server = a.b.c.d) to resolve hostnames of hosts with dynamic DHCP addresses, including machine 1. Both machine 1 and 2 resolve hostnames of hosts running MS Windows with DHCP perfectly. However, when I try to ping machine 1 from machine 2, it pings the ip address of the vmware network interface (vmnet0) and not eth0. Its not important if you know what vmware is or does I think. Basically machine 2 is pinging the address of the wrong network interface for machine 1. However, and this is the killer, all other (MS) machines on the network ping machine 1 with the address for eth0, the network interface that I want. Everything works fine. Only machine 2 pings the wrong network interface (vmnet0) address. I'm guessing that this can be fixed with a configuration setting on machine 1 (who may not be advertising its address properly and only samba notices the problem). However, I'm not sure about this. Just guessing. Does anyone have any idea what is going on here and how I can convince machine 2 that machine 1's address is the one from eth0? Thanks for any help. Sincerely, John Russell -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] samba resolves wrong wins ip address
Hello all, This has been making me crazy for a while, but it seems like a really easy fix. I just can't figure out what it is. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated. I have two Linux machines existing on a mostly MS network and have samba running well on each. However, one machine resolves the wrong ip address of the other machine. Here's the setup. Machine 1: Laptop uses DHCP to get dynamic address uses samba-3.0.1 (wins server = a.b.c.d) to register name/ip address with WINS server so MS and samba machines on the network can resolve its hostname to its dynamic address. also runs vmware in bridged networking mode (read on) Machine 2: Server has static ip address uses samba-2.2.7a (wins server = a.b.c.d) to resolve hostnames of hosts with dynamic DHCP addresses, including machine 1. Both machine 1 and 2 resolve hostnames of hosts running MS Windows with DHCP perfectly. However, when I try to ping machine 1 from machine 2, it pings the ip address of the vmware network interface (vmnet0) and not eth0. Its not important if you know what vmware is or does I think. Basically machine 2 is pinging the address of the wrong network interface for machine 1. However, and this is the killer, all other (MS) machines on the network ping machine 1 with the address for eth0, the network interface that I want. Everything works fine. Only machine 2 pings the wrong network interface (vmnet0) address. I'm guessing that this can be fixed with a configuration setting on machine 1 (who may not be advertising its address properly and only samba notices the problem). However, I'm not sure about this. Just guessing. Does anyone have any idea what is going on here and how I can convince machine 2 that machine 1's address is the one from eth0? Thanks for any help. Sincerely, John Russell -- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] samba resolves wrong wins ip address
On Friday 02 January 2004 11:46, John Russell wrote: Does anyone have any idea what is going on here and how I can convince machine 2 that machine 1's address is the one from eth0? Why would ping resolve an address through WINS? It seems that DNS or hosts is a more likely prospect. -- Chris Do not reply to the email address. Please use the contact page below for any desired direct replies. Apologies for the inconvenience. realcomputerguy dot com slash contact dot html -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] samba resolves wrong wins ip address
On Fri, 2004-01-02 at 12:04, tcg wrote: On Friday 02 January 2004 11:46, John Russell wrote: Does anyone have any idea what is going on here and how I can convince machine 2 that machine 1's address is the one from eth0? Why would ping resolve an address through WINS? It seems that DNS or hosts is a more likely prospect. DNS and hosts file are not capable of resolving dynamic address assigned by DHCP. When these machines come on line they register with the local WINS server so that their hostname can be resolved to their new dynamic address. I have an entry in nsswitch.conf to add wins to the list of places to resolve hostnames. e.g. from /etc/nsswitch.conf hosts: files dns wins without that last entry, I can't resolve any DHCP windows hosts. John -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] samba resolves wrong wins ip address
On Fri, 2004-01-02 at 10:12, John Russell wrote: On Fri, 2004-01-02 at 12:04, tcg wrote: On Friday 02 January 2004 11:46, John Russell wrote: Does anyone have any idea what is going on here and how I can convince machine 2 that machine 1's address is the one from eth0? Why would ping resolve an address through WINS? It seems that DNS or hosts is a more likely prospect. DNS and hosts file are not capable of resolving dynamic address assigned by DHCP. When these machines come on line they register with the local WINS server so that their hostname can be resolved to their new dynamic address. I have an entry in nsswitch.conf to add wins to the list of places to resolve hostnames. e.g. from /etc/nsswitch.conf hosts: files dns wins without that last entry, I can't resolve any DHCP windows hosts. --- wins provides NETBIOS names - not fqdn names. DHCP BIND should be capable of resolving / registering dns names of dynamically assigned addresses if configured to do so. 'man dhcpd.conf' Craig -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] samba resolves wrong wins ip address
On Fri, 2004-01-02 at 12:51, Jason Balicki wrote: I'm not using samba as a wins server. It is a client to another WINS server to which I do not have access. However, I don't think that the database is corrupt as _every_ windows machine is able to resolve the address of machine 1 (see original email). Only machine 2 gets the ip address of the wrong interface. That's what confuses me. Thanks for the idea. Hmmm. Let's see what everyone else is saying. Do this (from machine 2): arp -a and then nmblookup nameofvmwareguest and then nmblookup nameofvmwarehost and then half order of kung po chicken and then berlioz:/home/jorussel# arp -a bxb2-bb-hsrp.cisco.com (161.44.79.1) at 00:00:0C:07:AC:01 [ether] on eth0 ? (161.44.79.176) at 00:02:8A:36:63:87 [ether] on eth0 ? (161.44.79.220) at 00:0C:29:46:EE:9A [ether] on eth0 berlioz:/home/jorussel# nmblookup jorussel-w2ks --vmware guest name querying jorussel-w2ks on 161.44.79.255 161.44.79.220 jorussel-w2ks00 berlioz:/home/jorussel# nmblookup mendelssohn --vmware host and machine 1 querying mendelssohn on 161.44.79.255 161.44.79.176 mendelssohn00 -- this is the CORRECT address. berlioz:/home/jorussel# ping mendelssohn PING mendelssohn (192.168.35.1) 56(84) bytes of data. -- this is the WRONG address AAGGH!! So what is ping doing? --- mendelssohn ping statistics --- 21 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 20012ms berlioz:/home/jorussel# m kung po chicken bash: m: command not found what should be the current ip of machine 1 and machine 2 and the vmware guest (machine v?) machine 1 161.44.79.176 machine 2 161.44.79.31 (not important I think) machine v (guest on machine 1) 161.44.79.220 because the guest is in bridged mode, it gets its own ip address on the network and looks like a normal machine. however, the host communicates with it through a network interface (vmnet8) on machine 1: mendelssohn:~ /sbin/ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:02:8A:36:63:87 inet addr:161.44.79.176 Bcast:255.255.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST NOTRAILERS RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:2845610 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1032601 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:2076416902 (1980.2 Mb) TX bytes:134805682 (128.5 Mb) Interrupt:11 Base address:0x8000 Memory:d020-d0200038 loLink encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:37006 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:37006 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:19646754 (18.7 Mb) TX bytes:19646754 (18.7 Mb) vmnet8Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:50:56:C0:00:08 inet addr:192.168.35.1 Bcast:192.168.35.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:835 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b) So it is this vmnet8 address that machine 2 is getting. I'm so confused. Thanks a lot for your help. John and then Send me the results, if you would please. :) --J(K) -- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
