You will need to make some allowances in reading this response (and probably any others you get here), since LRP 2.9.8 is pretty much ancient history to most active LEAF users. (In face, I didn't even remember that 2.9.8 included the "ip" command.)
Both interfaces are shown as having addresses on the same private-address network. That's odd and it suggests a fundamental error in your physical setup. Perhaps you can tell us what the physical setup is and what networks the internal and external interfaces are *supposed* to be connected to? I see that you specified adjacent addresses by hand in /etc/network.conf, but that doesn't tell us what the underlying physical setup is (or perhaps we need to know *why* you want two interfaces connected to the same LAN and network). The second interface is not being used because there is no reason local to the router to use it; the routing table has identical entries for the two interfaces, and eth0 comes first. I'm a wee bit surprised that this affects the arp responses as well as higher level ones, though ... unless the pinging machine itself has a fairly unusual routing table. Even if you disconnect the first card from the LAN, the routing table still believes it to be the route to the LAN, so it tries to use it (and fails) to respond to pings. The small number of RX packets are easy to understand; something else on the LAN tried to connect to that IP address. (What? Beats me; I don't know anything about your LAN. Probably the pings and the related arp queries.) The small number of TX packets are a bit toughter to understand. If you were using DHCP, I'd guess they were connected with getting a lease, but as it is, I've no idea what they are. There is no way to "ping" a MAC address directly; ping is a network-layer (IP) protocol, not a link-layer (Ethernet or equivalent) one. I can't think of a link-layer equivalent, either, offhand ... unless maybe this capability is included in a network monitoring package like ethereal? (Does anyone know?) At 02:37 PM 5/28/02 -0400, Nachman Yaakov Ziskind wrote: >... put together the 2.9.8 distribution from LRP, and I'm stuck here: > >Although I have two 'identical' (in the same way that snowflakes are >identical) >3com cards, and they appear to be properly configured: > >eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:10:5A:E1:E3:8B > inet addr:10.1.1.202 Bcast:10.1.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 > RX packets:12362 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:1639 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 > Interrupt:10 Base address:0xe800 > >eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:A0:24:57:55:BE > inet addr:10.1.1.203 Bcast:10.1.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 > RX packets:1474 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:8 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 > Interrupt:12 Base address:0xec00 > >apparently the second interface is not being used (I'm at a loss to >explain the >small number of RX/TX packets. I cannot, by any activity, increment these >stats). I base this on: > >1) Unplugging the second card still lets both ip #'s respond to pings; > >2) Unplugging the first card stops both addresses from pinging; and > >3) This datum from another box on the network, that I'm pinging from: > >[....] >quack (10.1.1.202) at 0:10:5a:e1:e3:8b (802.3) >linux2 (10.1.1.203) at 0:10:5a:e1:e3:8b (802.3) >[....] > >Both cards have link lights. Some data: > >quack# uname -a >Linux quack 2.2.16 #1 Sun Jul 16 18:29:35 EDT 2000 i386 unknown > >quack# ip addr show >1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP> mtu 3924 qdisc noqueue > link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 > inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo >2: brg0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop > link/ether fe:fd:03:bb:63:33 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff >3: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 100 > link/ether 00:10:5a:e1:e3:8b brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > inet 10.1.1.202/24 brd 10.1.1.255 scope global eth0 >4: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 100 > link/ether 00:a0:24:57:55:be brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > inet 10.1.1.203/24 brd 10.1.1.255 scope global eth1 > >quack# ip route show >10.1.1.0/24 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 10.1.1.202 >10.1.1.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 10.1.1.203 >default via 10.1.1.248 dev eth0 metric 1 > >quack# netstat -rn >Kernel IP routing table >Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt Iface >10.1.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 >10.1.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 >0.0.0.0 10.1.1.248 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 > >quack# lsmod >Module Pages Used by >3c59x 17988 2 > >from /etc/network.conf: > >[...] >IF0_IFNAME=eth0 >IF0_IPADDR=10.1.1.202 >IF0_NETMASK=255.255.255.0 >IF0_BROADCAST=10.1.1.255 >IF0_IP_SPOOF=YES > >IF1_IFNAME=eth1 >IF1_IPADDR=10.1.1.203 >IF1_NETMASK=255.255.255.0 >IF1_BROADCAST=10.1.1.255 >IF1_IP_SPOOF=YES >[...] > >(would posting more of this be useful? > >Any suggestions, etc. would be appreciated. > >(trivia q: is there any way to ping by MAC address?) -- -----------------------------------------------"Never tell me the odds!"-------------- Ray Olszewski -- Han Solo Palo Alto, California, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________________________ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm ------------------------------------------------------------------------ leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
