On Jun 12, Tony Firecloud wrote: > > I was using an incorrect patch cord; now i have store-bought > crossover cables; i'm still not getting something. The below > paste is self-expanatory: > (The hosts are directly cabled NIC to NIC with a crossover cable) > > From host I > makua:~# ifconfig > eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:10:5A:1B:F3:6B > inet addr:10.0.0.1 Bcast:10.255.255.255 Mask:255.0.0.0 > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 > RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:3 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 > RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:180 (180.0 b) > Interrupt:10 Base address:0xf480 > thats a darn strange netmask for a local network. You are supporting 2^{24} (16.7 million) hosts in the same 'local' neighbourhood. try 'ifconfig eth0 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 up' instead. > From host II > firecloud:~# ifconfig > eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:10:A4:E8:13:8F > inet addr:10.0.0.3 Bcast:10.255.255.255 Mask:255.0.0.0 > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 > RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 > RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b) > Interrupt:11 Base address:0x4000 > same here but instead 'ifconfig eth0 10.0.0.3 netmask 255.255.255.0'. Just a side note worth mentioning. The 10.x.x.x region is really only worth it for *large* multi-site networks. 172.16.x.x->172.32.x.x is suitable for 'medium' networks and 192.168.x.x is great for home networks, and other small scale stuff. There is not real advantage/disadvantages between the lot however the 'convention' for home stuff is 192.168.x.x, in my experience lusers into quake multiplayer use 10.x.x.x :) And that can only be a bad thing, 0verkill is much more suitable. Anyway this should not be effecting your network anyway. I feel a nastier problem is at foot, or something :) Probably something wrong with the 'medium' settings. Both are set to _half_ duplex 10Mbps (or 100Mbps) speed right? The only other idea I would have is that you have some voodoo iptables/ipchains ruleset on one of the machines preventing the packets actually transmitting/receiving....... good luck Alex -- ________________________ < Above all else -- sky. > ------------------------ \ ^__^ \ (oo)\_______ (__)\ )\/\ ||----w | || ||
Attachment:
pgpduMFonatl3.pgp
Description: PGP signature