Intel 82577LM Gigabit ethernet and Linux 2.6.34
in [Linux Hardware]
|
From: Zebee Johnstone on 14 Jun 2010 08:24 In comp.os.linux.hardware on Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:07:16 +0200 Arun Vidarjee <nospam(a)examle.com> wrote: > > Tried that with no success: > # ifconfig eth0 192.168.1.110 > # ifconfig eth0 > ... > inet addr: 192.168.1.110 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask: 255.255.255.0 > > # route > 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 Did you do ifconfig eth0 up ? If you run tcpdump in another shell, see anything interesting? tcpdump -i eth0 should be enough to see ping packets and arp packets. so.. # ifconfig eth0 192.168.1.110 netmask 255.255.255.0 up (being sure that nothing else is using that address) # route add default gw 192.168.1.1. (not really required but I find it helps) # ping 192.168.1.1 should give you arp req and pings: tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes 22:17:16.234911 arp who-has 192.168.1.253 tell 192.168.1.222 22:17:16.235926 arp reply 192.168.1.253 is-at 00:30:0a:77:d2:43 (oui Unknown) 22:17:16.235940 IP 192.168.1.222 > 192.168.1.253: ICMP echo request, id 5401, seq 1, length 64 22:17:16.239458 IP 192.168.1.253 > 192.168.1.222: ICMP echo reply, id 5401, seq 1, length 64 If you aren't seeing anything leaving then there's a serious problem. If you see the arp who-has but no reply then your router's ignoring you. Check your DHCP table to make sure it doesn't think something else has that address. Zebee
From: Arun Vidarjee on 14 Jun 2010 09:58 Hi Am 14.06.2010 14:24, schrieb Zebee Johnstone: > In comp.os.linux.hardware on Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:07:16 +0200 > Arun Vidarjee<nospam(a)examle.com> wrote: >> >> Tried that with no success: >> # ifconfig eth0 192.168.1.110 > > Did you do ifconfig eth0 up ? > > # ifconfig eth0 192.168.1.110 netmask 255.255.255.0 up That was it, thanks a log! I should have known, it was the same thing years ago with a wireless interface. Setting network manually to a static ip is OK now. Still can't get it from the DHCP-server. As I said earlier, the server side is OK, the same laptop in the same network, gets it network configuration from the same DHCP-server without a hitch. best regards Arun
From: Pascal Hambourg on 14 Jun 2010 11:07 Hello, Arun Vidarjee a �crit : > > Am 14.06.2010 14:24, schrieb Zebee Johnstone: >> In comp.os.linux.hardware on Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:07:16 +0200 >> Arun Vidarjee<nospam(a)examle.com> wrote: >>> Tried that with no success: >>> # ifconfig eth0 192.168.1.110 >> Did you do ifconfig eth0 up ? >> >> # ifconfig eth0 192.168.1.110 netmask 255.255.255.0 up > > That was it, thanks a log! I should have known, it was the > same thing years ago with a wireless interface. That really surprises me. From the first article in this thread eth0 was already up, and IME configuring an address on an interface with ifconfig implicitly sets it up. Besides, the "route" command output showed that a route to the subnet via eth0 existed, which can not happen when the interface is not up. Last, the error message "Destination Host Unreachable" indicates a problem with ARP resolution, which can only happen when the interface is up (the kernel won't even try to do ARP resolution if the interface is down). > Setting network manually to a static ip is OK now. Still > can't get it from the DHCP-server. As I said earlier, the > server side is OK, the same laptop in the same network, > gets it network configuration from the same DHCP-server > without a hitch. From the messages of dhcpcd, it seems that it gets a lease but for some reason does not configure the interface. Could you try another DHCP client such as pump or dhclient from ISC dhcp3 ?
From: Arun Vidarjee on 14 Jun 2010 14:06 Am 14.06.2010 17:07, schrieb Pascal Hambourg: > > Arun Vidarjee a �crit : >> >> Am 14.06.2010 14:24, schrieb Zebee Johnstone: >>> Did you do ifconfig eth0 up ? >>> >>> # ifconfig eth0 192.168.1.110 netmask 255.255.255.0 up >> >> That was it, thanks a log! I should have known, it was the >> same thing years ago with a wireless interface. > > That really surprises me. From the first article in this thread eth0 was > already up, and IME configuring an address on an interface with ifconfig > implicitly sets it up. Besides, the "route" command output showed that a > route to the subnet via eth0 existed, which can not happen when the > interface is not up. Last, the error message "Destination Host > Unreachable" indicates a problem with ARP resolution, which can only > happen when the interface is up (the kernel won't even try to do ARP > resolution if the interface is down). Good observation. This box is set to get a dhcp address during boot up which I can confirm because I see a dhcp-dialog identical to the one I posted in the OP. The ifconfig in that posting was the result of that. But there was no route to eth0, and the result to ping command was "Network not reachable". They came after I tried the static address manually, without "up". >> Setting network manually to a static ip is OK now. Still >> can't get it from the DHCP-server. As I said earlier, the >> server side is OK, the same laptop in the same network, >> gets it network configuration from the same DHCP-server >> without a hitch. > > From the messages of dhcpcd, it seems that it gets a lease but for some > reason does not configure the interface. Could you try another DHCP > client such as pump or dhclient from ISC dhcp3 ? Yes it could be the dhcp client. I'll try an alternative and come back. Arun
From: Arun Vidarjee on 14 Jun 2010 14:50
Hi all Am 14.06.2010 20:06, schrieb Arun Vidarjee: > Am 14.06.2010 17:07, schrieb Pascal Hambourg: >> >> Arun Vidarjee a �crit : >>> >>> Setting network manually to a static ip is OK now. Still >>> can't get it from the DHCP-server. As I said earlier, the >>> server side is OK, the same laptop in the same network, >>> gets it network configuration from the same DHCP-server >>> without a hitch. >> >> From the messages of dhcpcd, it seems that it gets a lease but for some >> reason does not configure the interface. Could you try another DHCP >> client such as pump or dhclient from ISC dhcp3 ? > > Yes it could be the dhcp client. I'll try an alternative and > come back. This is weird. I setup the boot up so that no dhcp-address is requested. After a fresh reboot: # ifconfig eth0 eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr ... BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX ... # route loopback * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo # dhclient eth0 # ifconfig eth0 eth0 Link:... inet addr:192.168.1.103 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr:... .... # route 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 loopback * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo default 192.168.1.1. 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 # cat resolv.conf nameserver MY.ISP.NAME.SERVER1 nameserver MY.ISP.NAME.SERVER2 everything is perfectly configured! I reboot # dhcpcd eth0 dhcpcd: version 5.2.2 starting dhcpcd: eth0: waiting for carrier dhcpcd: eth0: carrier acquired dhcpcd: eth0: rebinding lease of 192.168.1.103 dhcpcd: eth0: acknowledged 192.168.1.103 from 192.168.1.1 dhcpcd: eth0: checking for 192.168.1.103 dhcpcd: eth0: leased 192.168.1.103 for 86400 seconds dhcpcd: eth0: MTU set to 1492 dhcpcd: forking to background # ifconfig eth0 eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr ... BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX ... No IP-address! resolv.conf empty So dhcpcd or dhclient makes the differnce! As noted above dhcpcd is version 5.2.2. The distribution is Slackware 13.1 64bit. Arun |