Hello,
        The Macs are G4's with 9.X as the OS. They are relatively new. The
router is a Cisco 7000. The problem macs are connected to a hub that is also
connected directly to the router ethernet port. The hub is an ODS 1095 hub.


We found something interesting, though. If we take one of the problem nodes
and statically configure the network and node number, it successfully
connects to the network. We then configure the node to dynamically discover
the network and node number, shutdown the node, "clear app arp" on the
router, and restart the node, it successfully gets the right network and
node number. Is there a cache on the Mac?

Thanks.
Joe Quezada

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Priscilla Oppenheimer
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 3:56 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Appletalk Help [7:34079]


The Macs can obviously transmit OK. He sees them in the AppleTalk ARP cache 
on the router. But I agree with the gist of your message. We need more info 
to help him, and model numbers and Mac OS versions would be a good start, 
as well as the network topology. Also, as you say, he should find out how 
these Macs differ from the working ones. That's a good troubleshooting
method.

Priscilla

At 05:32 PM 2/6/02, Daniel Cotts wrote:
>Jose;
>We have no information on the model of Mac and the version of operating
>system on it. Older 7200s had garbage built-in ethernet ports. The solution
>was to buy an add-on NIC.
>So are the computers that are having problems in any way different from the
>ones that work? What model are they and what OS are they running?
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 4:02 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: Appletalk Help [7:34079]
> >
> >
> > Are the AppleTalk nodes in the same hub as the router? Are
> > you sure there's
> > not a switch in the way somewhere? What's your topology?
> >
> > The problem I described is so common (just ask any Apple SE),
> > that I'm
> > still sticking to it as my theory. It's all I have to go on.
> > My crystal
> > ball crashed.
> >
> > Try using Cisco's troubleshooting method:
> >
> > 0. Document your network topology and protocols.
> > 1. Define the problem.
> > 2. Gather facts.
> > 3. Consider possibilities.
> > 4. Create an action plan.
> > 5. Implement the action plan.
> > 6. Observe the results.
> > 7. Do problem symptoms stop?
> >
> > If no, go back to 4 or possibly to 2.
> > If yes, problem resolved, document the facts.
> >
> > Priscilla
> >
> > At 11:50 AM 2/6/02, Quezada, Jose L wrote:
> > >Hi Priscilla,
> > >         Thank you very much for the tips. Unfortunately,
> > they did not work.
> > >The Macintoshes are actually connected to a hub. Any other ideas.
> > >
> > >Thank you.
> > >Joe Quezada
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > >Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 12:24 PM
> > >To: Quezada, Jose L; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >Subject: Re: Appletalk Help [7:34079]
> > >
> > >
> > >Are the AppleTalk devices on a switch? This smells like a
> > portfast problem.
> > >Enable portfast on the switch ports, and I suspect the
> > problem will go away.
> > >
> > >I think that what's happening is that when the newly booted AppleTalk
> > >stations send their ZIPGetNetInfo packet to find out the
> > actual network
> > >number(s) and zone(s) for the segment, the switch is not yet
> > forwarding
> > >their packets. So they don't get through to the router. This
> > causes the
> > >stations to think they are on a non-routed network and to
> > stay with their
> > >startup network number in the 65,280-65,534 range.
> > >
> > >Later the stations send other broadcasts and the router sees
> > them and adds
> > >them to its ARP cache.
> > >
> > >As you may know already, a switch can take a couple minutes to start
> > >forwarding traffic as it works on pruning the topology into
> > a spanning
> > >tree. New Macintoshes boot way faster than this and can be
> > done with their
> > >initialization by the time the switch decides to forward
> > their traffic. The
> > >solution is to configure portfast (or the set port host
> > macro on high-end
> > >switches). These configurations cause the switch to start forwarding
> > >traffic immediately.
> > >
> > >HTH
> > >
> > >Priscilla
> > >
> > >
> > >At 12:24 PM 2/1/02, Quezada, Jose L wrote:
> > > >Hello all,
> > > >         Please excuse my ignorance with Appletalk. We
> > currently have a
> > > >problem with some nodes running Appletalk. In the apple
> > arp table of our
> > > >router, they show up with an address such as  65280.128.
> > My understanding
> > >is
> > > >that when a node boots up, it is assigned a temporary
> > network address from
> > > >the range of 65280 to 65534. The router will then reply
> > with a valid cable
> > > >range. The fact that this network address shows up in the
> > arp table tells
> > >me
> > > >that the router can see the node. If that is the case,
> > what can I check to
> > > >find out why the router is not sending the valid cable
> > range. We have
> > other
> > > >nodes on the same network which are working correctly. We
> > have also move
> > >the
> > > >problem nodes to another network and they work properly.
> > What else can I
> > > >check? What tests can I do?
> > > >
> > > >Any help would be appreciated.
> > > >
> > > >Thanks.
> > > >
> > > >Joe Quezada
> > > >Electronic Data Systems
> > > >48 Walter Jones Blvd.
> > > >El Paso, TX 79906
> > > >Phone: 915.783.7159 (8.955)
> > > >E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >________________________
> > >
> > >Priscilla Oppenheimer
> > >http://www.priscilla.com
> > ________________________
> >
> > Priscilla Oppenheimer
> > http://www.priscilla.com
________________________

Priscilla Oppenheimer
http://www.priscilla.com




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=34702&t=34079
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to