Title: RE: linux newbie attempts routing on redhat 5.2

I took some of Tim F. 's advice and I've found that I
am having some lower-level ethernet issues.
After I switched IP's and cables, the non-working interface was
working so I don't think the card is the problem.

It seems that when I plug any of these cards (3c905B-TX or 3c595)
into an 10Mbs or 10/100Mbs hub, I get a partition LED.
However, If I plug the same cards into a 3Com 100baseTX Hub, no such
problem. Could it be the packet sizes ?

Sean


-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Nugent [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 4:14 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Linux-net
Subject: Re: linux newbie attempts routing on redhat 5.2


On Wed Jun 21 2000 at 01:26, "Ben Burnett" wrote:

> Routing may not be compiled into the kernel in redhat 5.2, I had some
> problems getting it to work as well.

Yes it is (err, was).  I used that distro/kernel extensively as a
basic router.

> Tim fletcher suggested:
> Is /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward set to 1, (use cat to read it) if not
> use:
> echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
> *****************************
> The above only works of the kernel is compiled with IP_forwarding turned
> on...

(And it should be already).

On 5.x boxes, you can set IP forwarding (routing) on in the config
file:

        /etc/sysconfig/network

> Two 3Com 3c595 cards (both are using irq 9 -- is that ok ?; ifconfig sees
> them, so I'm assuming it's ok).

Yep, both pci - that's part of the magic of pci: shared interrupts.

> Details:
> Trying to set up the box as a router for two subnets:
> eth0 10.0.0.254
> eth1 192.168.200.254
> They seem to come up fine; 10.0.0.254 can ping everyone on it's subnet.
> However, 192.168.200.254 can ping only itself.  When I traceroute to others
> on the 192.168.200.0 subnet, traceroute tells me that since it found
> multiple NICs,
> it is using eth0 @ 10.0.0.254, even though the routing table looks like
> this:

traceroute -i eth1 -b 192.168.200.255

> routed is started.

Yuk, why run that hagged old protocol if you don't need it?

> What am i missing here ?

Turn on routing in the kernel seems like one thing to look at, but
it probably isn't the only thing going on.

Cheers
Tony
 -=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-
  Tony Nugent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>    Systems Administrator, RHCE
  GrowZone OnLine       (a project of) GrowZone Development Network
  POBox 475 Toowoomba Oueensland Australia 4350    Ph: 07 4637 8322
 -=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-=*#*=-

Reply via email to