Hi all,
I really need some urgent help with this I'm completely confused. I
have a FreeBSD 4.9 machine running ipfilter ipnat vrrp and a few other
services, today is the first time I tried to access through the specific
method but now every interface and every local address I try has the
on further tests?
Thanks again
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Gordon Freeman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 24 June 2004 11:09 PM
To: Dave Raven
Subject: Re: Urgent 4.9 networking problems
try ping -nR -c1 x.y.186.254
If you don't get the same lag then it is your DNS lookup that is
causing
should avoid the delay.
Thanks again
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Gordon Freeman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 24 June 2004 11:09 PM
To: Dave Raven
Subject: Re: Urgent 4.9 networking problems
try ping -nR -c1 x.y.186.254
If you don't get the same lag then it is your
, June 24, 2004 4:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Urgent 4.9 networking problems
Hi all,
I really need some urgent help with this I'm completely
confused. I
have a FreeBSD 4.9 machine running ipfilter ipnat vrrp and a few
other
services, today is the first time I tried to access through
: JJB [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 24 June 2004 11:23 PM
To: Dave Raven; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Urgent 4.9 networking problems
Your symptoms are typical of DNS time outs.
Ping ip address does no DNS lookups.
Ping freebsd.org will not work either.
With out a lot more detail about your
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Dave Raven wrote:
# ifconfig fxp1
fxp1: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500
inet x.y.186.3 netmask 0xff00 broadcast x.y.186.255
inet x.y.186.1 netmask 0x broadcast x.y.186.1
inet x.y.186.15 netmask 0x
Dave
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Stevens
Sent: 24 June 2004 11:32 PM
To: Dave Raven
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Urgent 4.9 networking problems
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Dave Raven wrote:
# ifconfig fxp1
fxp1: flags=8843UP
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Dave Raven wrote:
The original ip 186.3 sets the broadcast - any aliases after that must
have a /32 broadcast as they are aliases... That's correct isn't it
(rest of list) ?
I don't believe so - it's the netmask which needs to be /32, which you did
correctly. See:
now?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dave Raven
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 5:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Urgent 4.9 networking problems
I have made further progress - thanks for all your steady replies. I
know it
might look like
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 02:31:58PM -0700, Kevin Stevens wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Dave Raven wrote:
# ifconfig fxp1
fxp1: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500
inet x.y.186.3 netmask 0xff00 broadcast x.y.186.255
inet x.y.186.1 netmask 0x
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Matthew Seaman wrote:
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 02:31:58PM -0700, Kevin Stevens wrote:
Err -- no. The broadcast address is a function of the netmask.
Specifically, looking at IPv4 addresses/masks as 32bit integers, the
broadcast address has all ones where ever the netmask
Dave Raven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think I can solve the problem with the BIMAP - I'm just interested in
finding out why it has to wait to resolve the host name when I'm telnetting
directly to an ip address and I have no nameservers specified? Surely that
can't be the way it has to be...
12 matches
Mail list logo