Your ifconfig shows no loop back device (an "lo" entry should show up in
a ifconfig), is this the case, or did you leave out?

Alex V Flinsch wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 31 Oct 1999, you wrote:
> 
> >
> > > Machine 1 - windows1 ip address of 192.168.1.1
> > > Machine 2 - linux1 ip address of 192.168.1.1
> >
> > Is this a mistype?  Check 'ifconfig eth0' on Linux and 'winipcfg' on Windows
> > to see what each thinks it's IP is.
> >
> 
> Yes that was a typo,
> the corrected numbers are
> Machine 1 - windows1 ip address of 192.168.1.1
> Machine 2 - linux1 ip address of 192.168.1.2
> 
> > > /etc/hosts
> > > 192.168.1.2     localhost.localdomain   linux1
> > > 192.168.1.1     windows1 upstairs
> > > 192.168.1.2     linux1  basement
> >
> > That first line should read:
> >
> >       127.0.0.1       localhost.localdomain   localhost
> >
> 
> I fixed that
> 
> > else you'll find that some things break.
> >
> > > Found Macronix 98715 PMAC at I/O 0xe400.
> > > tulip.c:v0.89H 5/23/98 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > eth0: Macronix 98715 PMAC at 0xe400, 00 80 c6 f8 94 97, IRQ 11.
> >
> > Could you post the output of 'ifconfig eth0' and 'route -n'?
> >
> Here it is:
> [root@localhost alex]# ifconfig eth0
> eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:80:C6:F8:94:97
>           inet addr:192.168.1.2  Bcast:192.168.1.255  Mask:255.255.255.0
>           UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
>           RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
>           TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>           collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
>           Interrupt:11 Base address:0xe400
> 
> [root@localhost alex]# route -n
> Kernel IP routing table
> Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
> 192.168.1.2     0.0.0.0         255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0 eth0
> 206.115.158.168 0.0.0.0         255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0 ppp0
> 192.168.1.0     0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     0      0        0 eth0
> 127.0.0.0       0.0.0.0         255.0.0.0       U     0      0        0 lo
> 0.0.0.0         206.115.158.168 0.0.0.0         UG    0      0        0 ppp0
> 
> Would I be correct in thinking that the 192.168.1.0 in the above
> destinations  should be something else (line 192.168.1.1 ?) or am I completely
> off base?
> 
> --
> Alex

-- 
Brett Jones
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to