LinuxQuestions.org
Support LQ: Use code LQ3 and save $3 on Domain Registration
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Networking
User Name
Password
Linux - Networking This forum is for any issue related to networks or networking.
Routing, network cards, OSI, etc. Anything is fair game.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 03-24-2007, 04:18 PM   #16
acid_kewpie
Moderator
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo, RHEL, Fedora, Centos
Posts: 43,397

Rep: Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963

ahhh well, that's just as much to hold on to... your nic isn't even up... even if the dhcp attempt fails the nic would still be up... so ifconfig doesn't even list eth0?
 
Old 03-24-2007, 06:20 PM   #17
PieSquared
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 19

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Here is what ifconfig tells me:

eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:C0:A8:87:26:7D
inet addr:192.168.1.101 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: fe80::2c0:a8ff:fe87:267d/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:4779 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:6872 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:344083 (336.0 KiB) TX bytes:531625 (519.1 KiB)
Interrupt:201 Base address:0x4c00

lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
RX packets:2575 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:2575 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:249061 (243.2 KiB) TX bytes:249061 (243.2 KiB)
 
Old 03-24-2007, 10:00 PM   #18
billairds
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Feb 2007
Posts: 24

Rep: Reputation: 16
Wink

I suggest you comfirm the address to the roouter is correct. try resetting to factory defaults and log on and then setup your new addressing. from what ive read your eth0 is working.



this is mine and it works:root@darkstar:~# ifconfig
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:03:6D:1F:BD:E8
inet addr:192.168.0.3 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:38873 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:7568 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:14919791 (14.2 Mb) TX bytes:1358356 (1.2 Mb)
Interrupt:11 Base address:0xe400


this is the kernel iprouting:Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
localnet * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
loopback * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
default 192.168.0.2 0.0.0.0 UG 1 0 0 eth0


If the gateway 192.168.0.2 is off by one digit no connect is possible



Billairds
 
Old 03-25-2007, 08:22 AM   #19
PieSquared
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 19

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
No, the gateways is correct, because if booting up on Windows and running ipconfig -a it says the default gateway is 192.168.1.1.

Here is the routing table:
Code:
Kernel IP Routing table
Destination       Gateway        Genmask        Flags   Metric   Ref    Use   Iface
192.168.1.0       *              255.255.255.0   U       0         0      0     eth0
default           192.168.1.1    0.0.0.0         UG      0         0      0     eth0
My routing table does not include loopback or localnet (What's this?). Could this have any effect?

Also, what does destination mean, on the first entry? Because 192.168.1.0 is not the IP of the computer or the router.

Another idea: Could this have something to do with the hosts in System -> Administration -> Networking? The three hosts that have a 4-number IP are:

127.0.0.1 localhost
127.0.1.1 agibi
192.168.1.1 home

agibi is my user. The rest of the hosts have IP's like fe00:0 or ff02:1.

Suggestions?
 
Old 03-25-2007, 09:54 AM   #20
acid_kewpie
Moderator
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo, RHEL, Fedora, Centos
Posts: 43,397

Rep: Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963
well if ifconfig says that the nic is up, then that tcpdump command must must must work... try adding a "-i eth0" to it to explicitly use eth0.
 
Old 03-25-2007, 10:41 AM   #21
PieSquared
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 19

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Hahah, I just realized... Sorry, tcpdump does work. It didn't at that time becausetcp I did "tcpdump ..." instead of "sudo tcpdump ..."

If I execute "sudo tcpdump -vn arp or tcmp" the output is this:

tcpdump: listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes
11:27:10.923813 aro who-has 196.168.1.100 tell 196.168.1.100
...above repeated some times...
11:27:10.923813 aro who-has 196.168.1.1 tell 196.168.1.100
11:27:10.923813 aro who-has 196.168.1.100 tell 196.168.1.100
11:27:10.923813 aro who-has 196.168.1.1 tell 196.168.1.100
11:27:10.923813 aro who-has 196.168.1.100 tell 196.168.1.100
11:27:10.923813 aro who-has 196.168.1.100 tell 196.168.1.100
11:27:10.923813 aro who-has 196.168.1.100 tell 196.168.1.100
...

39 packets captured
78 packets received by filter
0 packets dropped by kernel


What does that mean?

And what is the "filter"?

Thanks again!
 
Old 03-25-2007, 11:02 AM   #22
acid_kewpie
Moderator
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo, RHEL, Fedora, Centos
Posts: 43,397

Rep: Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963
ok so a few things here say that firstly the box does think that that address is local, which is a start. also though, nothign is replying to the arp's, i.e. the router isn't "owning up" to having that address. odd. could mean a number of things here then. firstly that packet has not yet been guarenteed to be going onto the wire physically. do you have another box on the network you can run tcpdump or wireshark on (wireshark runs on windows too)? if they can also see these arp requests then clearly it is getting out of the physical box, if not, then it's not. i'm certainly inclined to think that that's the case as otherwise it's the route not responding to the arps. now those arps are created by the operating system, so are technically able to be different to the windows equivalents, but still, not likely to be a fault.
 
Old 03-25-2007, 11:35 AM   #23
Emerson
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana
Distribution: Gentoo ~
Posts: 3,177

Rep: Reputation: Disabled


It may be a router built-in switch problem. Try resetting the router and using another port. Do not boot into Windows.

 
Old 03-25-2007, 12:51 PM   #24
jmbrink26
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2006
Posts: 72

Rep: Reputation: 15
Well, the arp cache is what is used in reverse DNS lookup.

However, I'm not sure how much bearing ARP(ARPA) really has on this particular issue, being the root of the problem is not a DNS name resolution issue, rather an issue with ICMP and/or TCP/IP.

Now, did you clear the routing tables on your router as suggested before? If that gets all cached up, and can cause the router to reject that MAC Address.

For tcpdump also include -i with the interface name (i.e. -i eth0).

but, the
 
Old 03-25-2007, 01:04 PM   #25
acid_kewpie
Moderator
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo, RHEL, Fedora, Centos
Posts: 43,397

Rep: Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963Reputation: 1963
since when did arp and dns having anything at all in common?? before *ANY* unicast traffic is placed onto the network, valid ARP records must be held on the source machine. if that record is not already known, then an ARP occurs. this has NOTHING to do with DNS lookups at all.
 
Old 03-25-2007, 01:55 PM   #26
>>BLACKHOLE<<
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2006
Location: In the bended light of the prism-
Distribution: Mandriva
Posts: 53

Rep: Reputation: 15
what's up-

What's your router and card type? I was having the same problems and I ended up just getting another brand of router and card.

Some of this hardware aint worth @$#%-@! Everything seems to be on point with your configuration. It's just your DHCP is not working!! I suggest trying another card type.

_________________
>>BLACKHOLE<<

>>BLACKHOLE<<

2007-(-_+)
 
Old 03-25-2007, 01:55 PM   #27
Petro P
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto, Canada
Distribution: Gentoo GNU/Linux
Posts: 15

Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by acid_kewpie
since when did arp and dns having anything at all in common?? before *ANY* unicast traffic is placed onto the network, valid ARP records must be held on the source machine. if that record is not already known, then an ARP occurs. this has NOTHING to do with DNS lookups at all.
Acid is completely right, why don't you just try manually adding your router to the ARP table and then try to ping it? (You do this using the arp command, just 'man arp' for more info)
 
Old 03-25-2007, 04:34 PM   #28
PieSquared
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 19

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Thanks for clarifying, Petro. I executed "sudo arp --set 192.168.1.1 00045AF7417E". It worked and now arp -n outputs this:

Code:
Address          HWtype  HWaddress           Flags Mask              Iface
192.168.1.1      ether   00:04:5A:F7:41:7E   CM                      eth0
When I then ping 92.168.1.1 it doesn't say anything, and it doesn't return. It just sits there with the little header, waiting:

PING 198.162.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data.

Any more suggestions?
 
Old 03-25-2007, 05:04 PM   #29
PieSquared
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 19

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
I have set up a wireless connection successfully. However, I would still like to be able to set up a wired connection as well. Will the wireless connection help diagnose the problem?
 
Old 03-25-2007, 06:57 PM   #30
Petro P
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto, Canada
Distribution: Gentoo GNU/Linux
Posts: 15

Rep: Reputation: 0
Since the problem seems to be related only to the wired interface, the only way it can help us is because we know it's not a problem with the router for sure then (but since you have other machines that work fine, we sort of knew this already).
 
  


Reply

Tags
dhcp, ping, router


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NIC Not Working In 10.1 - Cannot Ping Router, Access Internet contillion Suse/Novell 6 09-08-2006 02:46 PM
LAN/ADSL Router ping working but DNS ping fails R N Ghosh Linux - Networking 1 01-13-2006 07:44 AM
Home network: connecting to a Linksys router for DHCP IP address - no ping gunther Linux - Networking 28 05-20-2005 10:14 PM
networking not working, nic is loaded, can ping router dns21 Slackware 11 02-16-2005 12:47 AM
My laptop receives an IP via DHCP, but can't ping router or outside IP's! Max P0wer Linux - Networking 12 08-17-2004 05:45 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:05 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration