LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Home Forums Tutorials Articles Register
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 11-15-2004, 02:41 PM   #1
ezeke1
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 8

Rep: Reputation: 0
Private LAN setup with redhat 9 help


Hello All,
I'm setting up a small network of workstations running redhat 9 and unfortunately I cannot get them to ping each other. Here is the basic setup and the things I've tried so far. If anyone can shed some light and tell me what I am missing I'll be more than greatful.

Basically I have 2+ computers that are connected via a 16-port Linksys hub.
The addressing scheme is a class A network, for example
Code:
WS 1:
eth0: 10.0.1.1
lo: 127.0.0.1
mask: 255.0.0.0
gateway: 0.0.0.0

WS2 :
eth0: 10.0.1.2
lo: 127.0.0.1 
mask 255.0.0.0
gateway: 0.0.0.0

A route dump shows the following
Code:
WS 1:
10.0.0.0            0.0.0.0        255.0.0.0      U     0    0     eth0
127.0.0.0          0.0.0.0        255.0.0.0      U     0    0     lo

WS 2:
10.0.0.0            0.0.0.0        255.0.0.0      U     0    0     eth0
127.0.0.0          0.0.0.0        255.0.0.0      U     0    0     lo
The troubleshooting I've done so far is:
1. disabled Iptables and all firewall
2. tried adding static routes from one computer to the other and that doesn't seem to alleviate the problem.
3. I verified the interfaces on each workstation is up by pinging its eth0 and loopback
4. verified that proc/sys/net/ipv4/icmp_echo_ignore_all
is set to 0
5. cabling and hub is good, all are brand new


I'm not sure what else I could be doing wrong since the topology is very simple and the ip assignments are fine.


Thanks in advance
 
Old 11-15-2004, 03:13 PM   #2
phatboyz
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Mooresville NC
Distribution: CentOS 4,Free BSD,
Posts: 358

Rep: Reputation: 30
I'd change the netmask to 255.255.255.0

It also helps to have gateway that is providing the static ip or dhcp
 
Old 11-15-2004, 03:23 PM   #3
ezeke1
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 8

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Thanks for the response phatboyz

I ran my IPs through a ip calculator I found online and it verified the mask should be 255.0.0.0 for the class A addresses. I also fiddled with the mask and changed it to 255.255.255.0 like you said and that didn't work in the past.

Regarding your comment about the gateway, should I set up one workstation as a dhcp server? I'm trying to get away from the dhcp service and just have everything talk peer to peer. The reason I use a 0.0.0.0 gateway is to indicate the workstations are directly connected. I'm really not sure how to set up a gateway that provides static and if you can provide more info on that I'll give it a try.

Thanks
 
Old 11-15-2004, 03:37 PM   #4
phatboyz
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Mooresville NC
Distribution: CentOS 4,Free BSD,
Posts: 358

Rep: Reputation: 30
Ok you have a linksys router , not a hub right?

Last edited by phatboyz; 11-16-2004 at 10:01 AM.
 
Old 11-15-2004, 03:46 PM   #5
phatboyz
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Mooresville NC
Distribution: CentOS 4,Free BSD,
Posts: 358

Rep: Reputation: 30
Netranges for private networks

192.1.1.1
192.168.1.1
10.0.0.1
10.0.1.1
10.0.2.1
10.0.3.1
 
Old 11-15-2004, 04:03 PM   #6
ezeke1
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 8

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
I have a hub so I'll stick to the 0.0.0.0 gateway like you said.

I think the 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255 is the class C net and
10.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255 is the class A net.

Given that I think my addressing scheme is correct and I assume that my workstations should be able to ping each other. But pings are returning "Destination host unreachable".
 
Old 11-16-2004, 07:01 AM   #7
phatboyz
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Mooresville NC
Distribution: CentOS 4,Free BSD,
Posts: 358

Rep: Reputation: 30
Seems wierd to me,

I edit this post cause I was not thinking when I responded

Last edited by phatboyz; 11-16-2004 at 10:02 AM.
 
Old 11-16-2004, 08:03 AM   #8
scowles
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Location: Texas, USA
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 620

Rep: Reputation: 31
Quote:
Originally posted by phatboyz
Netranges for private networks

192.1.1.1
192.168.1.1
10.0.0.1
10.0.1.1
10.0.2.1
10.0.3.1
huh? A cut/paste from the rfc1918
Code:
3. Private Address Space

   The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) has reserved the
   following three blocks of the IP address space for private internets:

     10.0.0.0        -   10.255.255.255  (10/8 prefix)
     172.16.0.0      -   172.31.255.255  (172.16/12 prefix)
     192.168.0.0     -   192.168.255.255 (192.168/16 prefix)

   We will refer to the first block as "24-bit block", the second as
   "20-bit block", and to the third as "16-bit" block. Note that (in
   pre-CIDR notation) the first block is nothing but a single class A
   network number, while the second block is a set of 16 contiguous
   class B network numbers, and third block is a set of 256 contiguous
   class C network numbers.
If I understand the OP intent, he has simply elected to use a "classfull" netmask (vs. classless). Granted, thats alot of hosts (256^3) that can be defined - but in his test environment, he should still be able to ping the other hosts on the 10.0.0.0/8 network address. Even without the default route defined.
 
Old 11-16-2004, 08:37 AM   #9
phatboyz
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Mooresville NC
Distribution: CentOS 4,Free BSD,
Posts: 358

Rep: Reputation: 30
Its cableing or firewall issue.

Last edited by phatboyz; 11-16-2004 at 10:03 AM.
 
Old 11-16-2004, 09:29 AM   #10
ezeke1
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 8

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally posted by scowles
huh? A cut/paste from the rfc1918
Code:
3. Private Address Space

   The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) has reserved the
   following three blocks of the IP address space for private internets:

     10.0.0.0        -   10.255.255.255  (10/8 prefix)
     172.16.0.0      -   172.31.255.255  (172.16/12 prefix)
     192.168.0.0     -   192.168.255.255 (192.168/16 prefix)

   We will refer to the first block as "24-bit block", the second as
   "20-bit block", and to the third as "16-bit" block. Note that (in
   pre-CIDR notation) the first block is nothing but a single class A
   network number, while the second block is a set of 16 contiguous
   class B network numbers, and third block is a set of 256 contiguous
   class C network numbers.
If I understand the OP intent, he has simply elected to use a "classfull" netmask (vs. classless). Granted, thats alot of hosts (256^3) that can be defined - but in his test environment, he should still be able to ping the other hosts on the 10.0.0.0/8 network address. Even without the default route defined.

That's what I was thinking too scowles. All the workstations are directly connected via the hub and I should be able to ping. But it doesn't seem as if the computers "see" each other. The workstations run redhat linux 9 so there's no windows involved. phatboyz makes a good point about possible firewall issues and to a certain extent I accounted for that by turning off iptables but something else may be running. I'm not too familiar with the firewall services on redhat 9 so if anyone can tell me how to detect which firewall service is running and how to turn it off that would be great.

Thanks all.
 
Old 11-16-2004, 09:59 AM   #11
phatboyz
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Mooresville NC
Distribution: CentOS 4,Free BSD,
Posts: 358

Rep: Reputation: 30
iptables -f

should flush the rules out.

Sorry I got this thread and another one mixed up...give me a moment to reread your problem and I'll give the answer.
 
Old 11-16-2004, 10:01 AM   #12
gani
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Metro Manila, Philippines
Distribution: Linuxmint, Slackware
Posts: 356

Rep: Reputation: 34
Before I'm using Slackware 10 as my NAT to the rest of my XPs until I replaced it now with OpenBSD. But OS here is not an issue. I used private IP address under class C (192.168.1) since I need to connect to the internet via my ADSL. As long as your NICs are all configured properly I don't see any reason that you could't ping each other. If you just intend to make a small LAN, simply give your NICs IP addresses such as: WS1: 192.168.0.1, WS2: 192.168.0.2, so on.

If after confirming that everything are configured as it should be, try to check your cables pairing. I mean the termination on both ends. It should be straight according to T568-B or T568-A. Below is the T568-B wire mapping or the pin assignments in your RJ-45 connector. 10/100Tx uses only Pairs 1 and 2 (pins 1 & 2; 3 & 6) respectively. 1000T (Gigabit) will use all of the pairs. Ofcourse the minimum cable now is Category 5 Enhanced.

End --- to --- End of cable

1. White-Orange-------------------------1. White-Orange
2. Orange----------------------------------2. Orange
3. White-Green---------------------------3. White-Green
4. Blue--------------------------------------4. Blue
5. White-Blue------------------------------5. White-Blue
6. Green------------------------------------6. Green
7. White-Brown----------------------------7. White-Brown
8. Brown------------------------------------8. Brown
 
Old 11-16-2004, 10:04 AM   #13
phatboyz
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Mooresville NC
Distribution: CentOS 4,Free BSD,
Posts: 358

Rep: Reputation: 30
Post the output of ifconfig -a here and lets take a deeper look into this.

Also have you edited the hosts file?
/etc/hosts
 
Old 11-16-2004, 10:25 AM   #14
gani
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Metro Manila, Philippines
Distribution: Linuxmint, Slackware
Posts: 356

Rep: Reputation: 34
# iptables -F

to flush all chains.

Post also this output:

# iptables -L

This will display your default rules in your INPUT, FORWARD and OUTPUT chains.
 
Old 11-16-2004, 10:45 AM   #15
gani
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: Metro Manila, Philippines
Distribution: Linuxmint, Slackware
Posts: 356

Rep: Reputation: 34
http://www.justlinux.com/nhf/Securit...es_Basics.html
 
  


Reply



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
cannot reach internet from private LAN toodr Linux - Networking 12 10-23-2005 07:44 PM
routing issue :- have a simple private LAN, with.... inode100 Linux - Newbie 4 02-23-2004 03:52 PM
routing issue :- have a simple private LAN, with.... inode100 Linux - Networking 10 02-22-2004 02:06 PM
Route a private LAN with 1 NIC freelinuxcpp Linux - Networking 4 11-01-2003 05:05 AM
allowing http, smtp, irc from private lan munisp Linux - Networking 1 12-17-2001 04:35 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Networking

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:22 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
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
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration