On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Russell Johnson wrote:
Nothing would be going out eth0, since it's not connected to anything,
and, as per Rich's message, it's not in a running state. As I recall, the
IPs Rich reported are in two different subnets, so, in theory, the IP
stack should try both routes, if
Running 'ifconfig -a' showed routes for both eth0 and wlan0, but only the
latter was RUNNING. So, as root, I ran 'ifconfig eth0 down' to remove the
routes and ... voila! That was the problem.
Now, what I'd like from you networking gurus is a script I can put in
rc.local to test if
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Rich Shepard wrote:
Now, what I'd like from you networking gurus is a script I can put in
rc.local to test if wlan0 is RUNNING. And, if it is, to take down eth0.
This way eth0 is taken out of the stack when the system boots and dhcpcd
sees a WAP, but otherwise it is
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Mike Connors wrote:
I cannot get my eth0 to go in / out of the running state by running ifup
/ ifdown, although it works with the loopback interface.
On Slackware, using 'ifconfig eth0 up|down' I can.
Also, two default routes on the same network and I have no problems.
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Rich Shepard rshep...@appl-ecosys.comwrote:
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Mike Connors wrote:
I cannot get my eth0 to go in / out of the running state by running
ifup
/ ifdown, although it works with the loopback interface.
On Slackware, using 'ifconfig eth0
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Larry Brigman wrote:
Actually you are wrong on this point. As you stated earlier today, once
you 'ifconfig eth0 down' things worked. If that was truely the case then
the interface was up but without a carrier. The routes would remain
intact as the kernel doesn't know
It shouldn't be in a running state unless there is physical
connectivity
and packets are flowing across the interface.
The eth0 interface is not RUNNING, but the routes are there and so is
the
constipation.
Actually you are wrong on this point. As you stated earlier today,
Yes, you are correct. A static config won't take the interface down so it
won't flush the routes.
On Apr 3, 2012 5:28 PM, Mike Connors mconno...@gmail.com wrote:
It shouldn't be in a running state unless there is physical
connectivity
and packets are flowing across the interface.
Please explain to me how the ethernet interface could interfere with the
wireless interface. I must be missing something critical here because
they're on different interfaces (eth0 and wlan0), and while both are UP,
only one is RUNNING.
Thanks,
Rich
There can be more than 1 default
On Sun, 1 Apr 2012, Russell Senior wrote:
If they are both configured for the same network,
Russell,
They're not. The ethernet is configured for use here, the wireless is not
donfigured for any specific network because it needs to work
[any|every]where.
You hand it a packet with a
Today I'll capture the display of 'route -n' and post it here. What I
saw
yesterday as the default gatewey for wlan0 was 10.5.70.1 and the default
gateway for eth0 was 192.168.55.4.
Try and open another term window and run tcpdump on the eth0 interface
while making some connection
On Apr 1, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Rich Shepard wrote:
As before, cannot ping any address on the local Class A network (nor any
world-addressible domain name or IP address). Trying to ping the gateway
(10.5.70.1) results in 'Destination unreachable'; trying the namesever
(8.8.8.8) results in
On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Russell Johnson wrote:
Have you verified with another patron as to what their DNS servers are set
to? If you've answered this previously, I've missed the answer.
Russell,
No one else with a computer when I'm there. And, I suspect they'd look
completely puzzled because
On Apr 2, 2012, at 10:20 AM, Rich Shepard wrote:
No one else with a computer when I'm there. And, I suspect they'd look
completely puzzled because they have no idea what 'DNS server' means. :-)
Well, I also noticed in a message post what I replied to that you plan on
taking both the
Russell Johnson wrote:
On Apr 2, 2012, at 10:20 AM, Rich Shepard wrote:
No one else with a computer when I'm there. And, I suspect they'd look
completely puzzled because they have no idea what 'DNS server' means. :-)
Well, I also noticed in a message post what I replied to that you plan on
On 2012-04-02 09:06, jen montserrat wrote:
Today I'll capture the display of 'route -n' and post it here.
What I
saw
yesterday as the default gatewey for wlan0 was 10.5.70.1 and the
default
gateway for eth0 was 192.168.55.4.
Try and open another term window and run tcpdump on the
Mike == Mike Connors mconno...@gmail.com writes:
Mike I'm curious if Russell Senior or anyone else involved with
Mike Personal Telco wifi ap setup can weigh in on how the the captive
Mike portal works for their WAPs and if a local DNS call is made or
Mike not.
We don't even know for sure that
jen == jen montserrat jen.montser...@gmail.com writes:
jen [...] You might also want to manually inject something
jen like the OpenDNS public DNS servers to use in /etc/resolv.conf
jen (*208.67.222.222 and 208.67.220.220)*
*If* the problem is related to a captive portal, you probably do *NOT*
On Apr 2, 2012, at 12:32 PM, Mike Connors wrote:
But if the first ip packets from Rich's computer go out eth0, they will
never make in to the WAP DHSP server and be redirected to the captive
portal. It's possible, depending on how the captive portal works and how
it's configured that a call
But if the first ip packets from Rich's computer go out eth0, they will
never make in to the WAP DHSP server and be redirected to the captive
portal. It's possible, depending on how the captive portal works and how
it's configured that a call to an internal DNS server doesn't need to
On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Mike Connors wrote:
But I think the strongest clue that it's most likely an ip connectivity
issue is the fact that he can't ping the default gateway, which is probably
the WAP, dhcp server, router, captive portal all in one. This tells me his
laptop is isolated from the
The location is probably immaterial; the coffee shop on the corner of
242nd and Stark is where I've been. My friend tries to connect at a coffee
shop in downtown Gresham. I'll drive to Portland to meet anyone willing to
devote the time to work this out ... and I'll buy the coffee (or
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 02:42:36PM -0700, Rich Shepard wrote:
The location is probably immaterial; the coffee shop on the corner of
242nd and Stark is where I've been. My friend tries to connect at a coffee
shop in downtown Gresham. I'll drive to Portland to meet anyone willing to
devote
Rich == Rich Shepard rshep...@appl-ecosys.com writes:
RichIn my naivte about the subtleties of wireless networking I'm
Rich floundering in a sea of good ideas offered by all of
Rich you. Obviously, my knowledge is but a small fraction of what's
Rich needed to resolve this issue.
If you
On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Russell Senior wrote:
E.g. if you paste these into a shell, and then email PLUG the contents
of the for-plug log files:
script -c 'echo ip addr ; ip addr ; echo ip route ; ip route ; echo iwconfig
; iwconfig' for-plug.log
script -c 'for i in $(ip route | grep default
The location is probably immaterial; the coffee shop on the corner of
242nd and Stark is where I've been. My friend tries to connect at a coffee
shop in downtown Gresham. I'll drive to Portland to meet anyone willing to
devote the time to work this out ... and I'll buy the coffee (or
On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Mike Connors wrote:
The curiosity of this problem has got this cat and it's a good excuse as
any for a bike ride. I don't get out that way very much either. I could
meet you tomorrow. What time is good for you?
Mike,
I work from home and have enough to do to keep me
On Mon, 02 Apr 2012 13:31:41 -0700
Russell Senior russ...@personaltelco.net dijo:
We don't even know for sure that the cafe Rich is going to has a
captive portal. They are fairly unusual in coffee shop scenarios
these days, since small operations mostly just buy an AP and plug it
in. I
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012, Neal wrote:
The point of my question was to verify that a default gateway was set
properly on the WLAN. That is, the default WLAN gateway was set to a valid
address on the WLAN subnet. If it's not you won't be able to access any IP
(including DNS) that's not on the WLAN
On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Rich Shepard rshep...@appl-ecosys.com wrote:
With an IP address, DNS servers, and gateway all assigned by the local
server, what might inhibit loading the 'Net access control page or any other
web page?
Since it is not clear exactly what the problem is, here
rshep...@appl-ecosys.com said:
When the system boots it connects automatically to the shop's wifi server.
The ESSID is 'WEBbeans-Silk Espresso', 'ifconfig wlan0' returns the IP address
10.5.70.104, broadcast address 10.5.70.255, and netmask 255.255.255.0.
The kernel routing table
On Sun, 1 Apr 2012, Bill Barry wrote:
Since it is not clear exactly what the problem is, here are some semi-wild
guesses.
Bill,
The problem is the Sony will not connect to any network via the wireless
interface. Here and at three outside 'wifi hot spots' it will be issued a
dynamic IP
Rich,
I missed the clue that you did not get wifi access at home either.
I retract my guesses and concur with John Meissen. Your ethernet
configuration is probably interfering with the wifi. Is your eth0
configuration set to come up and down automatically when the ethernet
cable is plugged in
On Sun, 1 Apr 2012, John Meissen wrote:
You say 'netstat -r' has TWO pairs of entries. So you're not disabling the
ethernet port? What's the full output of 'netstat -r'?
No, because there's no connection on eth0.
Most likely the ethernet port is being used as the prefered route, and so
On Sun, 1 Apr 2012, Bill Barry wrote:
I missed the clue that you did not get wifi access at home either. I
retract my guesses and concur with John Meissen. Your ethernet
configuration is probably interfering with the wifi. Is your eth0
configuration set to come up and down automatically when
rshep...@appl-ecosys.com said:
The ethernet interface is RUNNING only when there's a cable attached. On
the Toshiba, Sony, and Dell, ifconfig shows lo, eth0, and wlan0 at all times.
Only lo and EITHER eth0 or wlan0 is RUNNING depending on whether there's an
ethernet cable stuck in the
On Sun, 1 Apr 2012, Bill Barry wrote:
I missed the clue that you did not get wifi access at home either. I
retract my guesses and concur with John Meissen. Your ethernet
configuration is probably interfering with the wifi. Is your eth0
configuration set to come up and down automatically
On Sun, 1 Apr 2012, John Meissen wrote:
The TC/IP routing software is going to use what it finds in the routing
table. If the destination doesn't match a specific network in the table,
it will look for a default route.
John,
Doesn't the TC/IP software look at the RUNNING interface? In the
rshep...@appl-ecosys.com said:
Doesn't the TC/IP software look at the RUNNING interface? In the case of
the Sony, the routing table has a default gateway for wlan0.
No. TCP/IP doesn't know physical interfaces. It knows IP address. How the
packet gets out onto a physical wire is someone
On Sun, 1 Apr 2012, John Meissen wrote:
Yes, you have a default gateway for wlan0. But you said you ALSO had one for
eth0.
Because the routing table says it's available. And either it finds that route
first, or it has a lower metric...
OK. That makes sense.
Tomorrow I'll bring both
Rich == Rich Shepard rshep...@appl-ecosys.com writes:
RichPlease explain to me how the ethernet interface could
Rich interfere with the wireless interface. I must be missing
Rich something critical here because they're on different interfaces
Rich (eth0 and wlan0), and while both are UP,
Russell == Russell Senior russ...@personaltelco.net writes:
Russell How about showing us the output of a command that would
Russell remove the PEBKAC issue?
Russell What do:
Russell $ ip addr
Russell and
Russell $ ip route
Russell show when it is and isn't working? Install the
At the PLUG clinic last week the Sony Vaio laptop on the wireless
interface, wlan0, received an IP address, had the Free Geek server provide
content in /etc/resolv.conf, but would not load the Free Geek web page to
accept their terms and conditions and gain access to the 'Net.
This morning
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Rich Shepard rshep...@appl-ecosys.com wrote:
This morning I spent about an hour at a local coffee shop with the same
results: wlan0 was UP and RUNNING with the IP address of 10.5.70.104 and
I don't currently know enough about linux networking to solve it for
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012, Neal wrote:
I don't currently know enough about linux networking to solve it for
you, but what are the default gateway and subnet mask?
NealS,
The gateway and netmask are set by the DHCP server when it assigns an IP
address to the host. I don't recall what they were.
] Understanding Networking Components
At the PLUG clinic last week the Sony Vaio laptop on the wireless
interface, wlan0, received an IP address, had the Free Geek server provide
content in /etc/resolv.conf, but would not load the Free Geek web page to
accept their terms and conditions and gain access
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Rich Shepard rshep...@appl-ecosys.com wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012, Neal wrote:
I don't currently know enough about linux networking to solve it for
you, but what are the default gateway and subnet mask?
NealS,
The gateway and netmask are set by the DHCP
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012, eduncli...@gmail.com wrote:
Are you running NoScript?
Nope. Have no idea what that is.
Rich
___
PLUG mailing list
PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org
http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Rich == Rich Shepard rshep...@appl-ecosys.com writes:
RichAt the PLUG clinic last week the Sony Vaio laptop on the
Rich wireless interface, wlan0, received an IP address, had the Free
Rich Geek server provide content in /etc/resolv.conf, but would not
Rich load the Free Geek web page to
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012, Neal wrote:
The point of my question was to verify that a default gateway was set
properly on the WLAN. That is, the default WLAN gateway was set to a valid
address on the WLAN subnet. If it's not you won't be able to access any IP
(including DNS) that's not on the WLAN
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012, Russell Senior wrote:
Just a heads-up, NoCatAuth (which I believe FreeGeek is using) typically
won't let you use your own nameservers because all your traffic (with
specific exceptions) is blocked until you accept the conditions. In those
cases, the network is expecting
51 matches
Mail list logo
