RE: Urgent 4.9 networking problems

2004-06-24 Thread Dave Raven
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

Re: Urgent 4.9 networking problems

2004-06-24 Thread Bill Moran
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

RE: Urgent 4.9 networking problems

2004-06-24 Thread JJB
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 network environment, the best I can say is look at how your network resolves DNS lookups. Some times a ISP will change the ip address of

RE: Urgent 4.9 networking problems

2004-06-24 Thread Dave Raven
: 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

Re: Urgent 4.9 networking problems

2004-06-24 Thread Kevin Stevens
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

RE: Urgent 4.9 networking problems

2004-06-24 Thread Dave Raven
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

RE: Urgent 4.9 networking problems

2004-06-24 Thread freebsd
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:

RE: Urgent 4.9 networking problems

2004-06-24 Thread JJB
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

Re: Urgent 4.9 networking problems

2004-06-24 Thread Matthew Seaman
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

Re: Urgent 4.9 networking problems

2004-06-24 Thread Kevin Stevens
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

Re: Urgent 4.9 networking problems

2004-06-24 Thread Bill Moran
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...