Re: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400
wild guess but do you have a cross over cable between the 2 ? every time you try and tx you get a carrier error ! A On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 03:37:03PM +0930, Alan Millsted wrote: > Ok, I have done that and allthough I haven't fired up the modem yey I > can't see eth0 192.168.0.254 from anywhere. And this is the 'config -a' > output > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# service network start > Setting network parameters:[ OK ] > Bringing up loopback interface:[ OK ] > Bringing up interface at_home: [ OK ] > Bringing up interface the_world: [ OK ] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# ifconfig -a > eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:0D:61:6A:CA:A9 > inet addr:192.168.1.254 Bcast:192.168.1.255 > Mask:255.255.255.0 > inet6 addr: fe80::20d:61ff:fe6a:caa9/64 Scope:Link > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 > RX packets:352 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:76 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 > RX bytes:51971 (50.7 KiB) TX bytes:5848 (5.7 KiB) > Interrupt:10 Base address:0xa000 > > eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:04:75:E7:ED:6C > inet addr:192.168.0.254 Bcast:192.168.0.255 > Mask:255.255.255.0 > inet6 addr: fe80::204:75ff:fee7:ed6c/64 Scope:Link > UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 > RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:97 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:97 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 > RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:6054 (5.9 KiB) > Interrupt:5 Base address:0x9000 > > loLink encap:Local Loopback > inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 > inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host > UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 > RX packets:16310 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:16310 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 > RX bytes:13316576 (12.6 MiB) TX bytes:13316576 (12.6 MiB) > > sit0 Link encap:IPv6-in-IPv4 > NOARP MTU:1480 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:0 > RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b) > > Sa you see eth1 is up but not running??? > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 15 December 2004 11:38 AM > To: Alan Millsted > Subject: Re: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400 > > > > if you just have the modem and one pc on the same network 192.168.1.0/24 > and using pppoa or pppoe on the modem > then yes, if your doing it with 2 lan cards > in one box, then something like this > > modem 192.168.1.1 > > gateway eth0 192.168.1.254 > gateway eth1 192.168.0.254 > > hub > > other pcs in your lan 192.168.0.x > > these pcs use eth1 as default route > > gateway pc uses the modem as the default route > > and the firewall will need to be adjusted to suit. > you should be able to see the modem with a browser from the pc's on your > lan. > > Alan Millsted wrote: > > > > I need a bit of time to get my head round all that, but this isn't the > > > origial modem from TPG. I havent tried to set that one up on thia > > Linux box because that is my only link to the real world. Are you > > saying I should set the gateway on my system as the IP of the modem > > "192.168.1.1" Thanks and any info helps > > > > Alan > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, 15 December 2004 10:33 AM > > To: Alan Millsted > > Subject: Re: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400 > > > > Mate, these things can do your head in, tgp like most dsl providers > > should be using helstras network for the connection??? it will support > > > most modes of connection, so set the modem up like it was originally > > sent to you, connect to it with a pc on the same network as the modem > > using it as the gateway and ns then by driving the modem with a > > browser, see if you can get the connection happening, if so then the > > providers part is working fine. you could prolly even get away with > > using your modem like this with 2 lan cards in the gateway linux box, > > one on each network and route all the traffic out the lan card > >
Re: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400
hi pppoa is ppp over atm pppoe is ppp over ethernet the former is usually only atainable when the adsl modem is a pci card. the later is usuall what you get when the interface between the modem and the computer is ethernet Both only apply when the modem is in bridged mode A On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 01:00:28PM +0930, Alan Millsted wrote: > What's the difference between "pppoa and pppoe"< I hve been trying to > set it up as per ahow to from "Lnux.Questions.org" > That says "no IP on the NIC that the system is using to get to ISP just > a valid HWADDA." > > Your are right about doing your head in! > > Alan > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 15 December 2004 11:38 AM > To: Alan Millsted > Subject: Re: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400 > > > > if you just have the modem and one pc on the same network 192.168.1.0/24 > and using pppoa or pppoe on the modem > then yes, if your doing it with 2 lan cards > in one box, then something like this > > modem 192.168.1.1 > > gateway eth0 192.168.1.254 > gateway eth1 192.168.0.254 > > hub > > other pcs in your lan 192.168.0.x > > these pcs use eth1 as default route > > gateway pc uses the modem as the default route > > and the firewall will need to be adjusted to suit. > you should be able to see the modem with a browser from the pc's on your > lan. > > Alan Millsted wrote: > > > > I need a bit of time to get my head round all that, but this isn't the > > > origial modem from TPG. I havent tried to set that one up on thia > > Linux box because that is my only link to the real world. Are you > > saying I should set the gateway on my system as the IP of the modem > > "192.168.1.1" Thanks and any info helps > > > > Alan > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, 15 December 2004 10:33 AM > > To: Alan Millsted > > Subject: Re: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400 > > > > Mate, these things can do your head in, tgp like most dsl providers > > should be using helstras network for the connection??? it will support > > > most modes of connection, so set the modem up like it was originally > > sent to you, connect to it with a pc on the same network as the modem > > using it as the gateway and ns then by driving the modem with a > > browser, see if you can get the connection happening, if so then the > > providers part is working fine. you could prolly even get away with > > using your modem like this with 2 lan cards in the gateway linux box, > > one on each network and route all the traffic out the lan card > > connected to the modem, on the gateway box, route all internal > > traffic, to that lan card on the gateway box. > > > > or then frig with the modem to try and get it to do bridging mode till > > > it works, the pado timeout errors, or whatever, are usually to do with > > > authentication problems at the other end, and go away after an hour or > > > so > > > > i haven't really been following this thread, so this could all be > > bullshit, if so sorry for wasting your time. > > > > Alan Millsted wrote: > > > > > > This is the way I feel it should be (not that I realy know anything > > > about it) but logic seems to point that way, so I am thinking that > > > it is > > > > -- > > Greg > > > > -[ Registered Linux User#159346 * http://baratel.com/~greg/ ]- > > > > This Email may contain privileged information and remains the > > property of the author. You may not reveal the contents to > > anyone without the authors express authority to do so. > > > > ... If Bill Gates had a dime for every time a Windows box crashed... > > Oh, wait a minute, he already does. > > > > -- > > SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ > > Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html > > -- > Greg > > -[ Registered Linux User#159346 * http://baratel.com/~greg/ ]- > > This Email may contain privileged information and remains the > property of the author. You may not reveal the contents to > anyone without the authors express authority to do so. > > ... Microsoft has argued that open source is bad for business, but > you have to ask, "Whose business? Theirs, or yours?" --Tim O'Reilly > > > -- > SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ > Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html > signature.asc Description: Digital signature -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
RE: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400
Ok, I have done that and allthough I haven't fired up the modem yey I can't see eth0 192.168.0.254 from anywhere. And this is the 'config -a' output [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# service network start Setting network parameters:[ OK ] Bringing up loopback interface:[ OK ] Bringing up interface at_home: [ OK ] Bringing up interface the_world: [ OK ] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# ifconfig -a eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:0D:61:6A:CA:A9 inet addr:192.168.1.254 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::20d:61ff:fe6a:caa9/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:352 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:76 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:51971 (50.7 KiB) TX bytes:5848 (5.7 KiB) Interrupt:10 Base address:0xa000 eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:04:75:E7:ED:6C inet addr:192.168.0.254 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::204:75ff:fee7:ed6c/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:97 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:97 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:6054 (5.9 KiB) Interrupt:5 Base address:0x9000 loLink encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:16310 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:16310 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:13316576 (12.6 MiB) TX bytes:13316576 (12.6 MiB) sit0 Link encap:IPv6-in-IPv4 NOARP MTU:1480 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:0 RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b) Sa you see eth1 is up but not running??? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 15 December 2004 11:38 AM To: Alan Millsted Subject: Re: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400 if you just have the modem and one pc on the same network 192.168.1.0/24 and using pppoa or pppoe on the modem then yes, if your doing it with 2 lan cards in one box, then something like this modem 192.168.1.1 gateway eth0 192.168.1.254 gateway eth1 192.168.0.254 hub other pcs in your lan 192.168.0.x these pcs use eth1 as default route gateway pc uses the modem as the default route and the firewall will need to be adjusted to suit. you should be able to see the modem with a browser from the pc's on your lan. Alan Millsted wrote: > > I need a bit of time to get my head round all that, but this isn't the > origial modem from TPG. I havent tried to set that one up on thia > Linux box because that is my only link to the real world. Are you > saying I should set the gateway on my system as the IP of the modem > "192.168.1.1" Thanks and any info helps > > Alan > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 15 December 2004 10:33 AM > To: Alan Millsted > Subject: Re: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400 > > Mate, these things can do your head in, tgp like most dsl providers > should be using helstras network for the connection??? it will support > most modes of connection, so set the modem up like it was originally > sent to you, connect to it with a pc on the same network as the modem > using it as the gateway and ns then by driving the modem with a > browser, see if you can get the connection happening, if so then the > providers part is working fine. you could prolly even get away with > using your modem like this with 2 lan cards in the gateway linux box, > one on each network and route all the traffic out the lan card > connected to the modem, on the gateway box, route all internal > traffic, to that lan card on the gateway box. > > or then frig with the modem to try and get it to do bridging mode till > it works, the pado timeout errors, or whatever, are usually to do with > authentication problems at the other end, and go away after an hour or > so > > i haven't really been following this thread, so this could all be > bullshit, if so sorry for wasting your time. > > Alan Millsted wrote: > > > > This is the way I feel it should be (not that I realy know anything > > about it) but logic seems to point that way, so I am thinking that > > it is > >
RE: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400
What's the difference between "pppoa and pppoe"< I hve been trying to set it up as per ahow to from "Lnux.Questions.org" That says "no IP on the NIC that the system is using to get to ISP just a valid HWADDA." Your are right about doing your head in! Alan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 15 December 2004 11:38 AM To: Alan Millsted Subject: Re: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400 if you just have the modem and one pc on the same network 192.168.1.0/24 and using pppoa or pppoe on the modem then yes, if your doing it with 2 lan cards in one box, then something like this modem 192.168.1.1 gateway eth0 192.168.1.254 gateway eth1 192.168.0.254 hub other pcs in your lan 192.168.0.x these pcs use eth1 as default route gateway pc uses the modem as the default route and the firewall will need to be adjusted to suit. you should be able to see the modem with a browser from the pc's on your lan. Alan Millsted wrote: > > I need a bit of time to get my head round all that, but this isn't the > origial modem from TPG. I havent tried to set that one up on thia > Linux box because that is my only link to the real world. Are you > saying I should set the gateway on my system as the IP of the modem > "192.168.1.1" Thanks and any info helps > > Alan > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 15 December 2004 10:33 AM > To: Alan Millsted > Subject: Re: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400 > > Mate, these things can do your head in, tgp like most dsl providers > should be using helstras network for the connection??? it will support > most modes of connection, so set the modem up like it was originally > sent to you, connect to it with a pc on the same network as the modem > using it as the gateway and ns then by driving the modem with a > browser, see if you can get the connection happening, if so then the > providers part is working fine. you could prolly even get away with > using your modem like this with 2 lan cards in the gateway linux box, > one on each network and route all the traffic out the lan card > connected to the modem, on the gateway box, route all internal > traffic, to that lan card on the gateway box. > > or then frig with the modem to try and get it to do bridging mode till > it works, the pado timeout errors, or whatever, are usually to do with > authentication problems at the other end, and go away after an hour or > so > > i haven't really been following this thread, so this could all be > bullshit, if so sorry for wasting your time. > > Alan Millsted wrote: > > > > This is the way I feel it should be (not that I realy know anything > > about it) but logic seems to point that way, so I am thinking that > > it is > > -- > Greg > > -[ Registered Linux User#159346 * http://baratel.com/~greg/ ]- > > This Email may contain privileged information and remains the > property of the author. You may not reveal the contents to > anyone without the authors express authority to do so. > > ... If Bill Gates had a dime for every time a Windows box crashed... > Oh, wait a minute, he already does. > > -- > SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ > Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html -- Greg -[ Registered Linux User#159346 * http://baratel.com/~greg/ ]- This Email may contain privileged information and remains the property of the author. You may not reveal the contents to anyone without the authors express authority to do so. ... Microsoft has argued that open source is bad for business, but you have to ask, "Whose business? Theirs, or yours?" --Tim O'Reilly -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
RE: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400
I need a bit of time to get my head round all that, but this isn't the origial modem from TPG. I havent tried to set that one up on thia Linux box because that is my only link to the real world. Are you saying I should set the gateway on my system as the IP of the modem "192.168.1.1" Thanks and any info helps Alan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 15 December 2004 10:33 AM To: Alan Millsted Subject: Re: [SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400 Mate, these things can do your head in, tgp like most dsl providers should be using helstras network for the connection??? it will support most modes of connection, so set the modem up like it was originally sent to you, connect to it with a pc on the same network as the modem using it as the gateway and ns then by driving the modem with a browser, see if you can get the connection happening, if so then the providers part is working fine. you could prolly even get away with using your modem like this with 2 lan cards in the gateway linux box, one on each network and route all the traffic out the lan card connected to the modem, on the gateway box, route all internal traffic, to that lan card on the gateway box. or then frig with the modem to try and get it to do bridging mode till it works, the pado timeout errors, or whatever, are usually to do with authentication problems at the other end, and go away after an hour or so i haven't really been following this thread, so this could all be bullshit, if so sorry for wasting your time. Alan Millsted wrote: > > This is the way I feel it should be (not that I realy know anything > about it) but logic seems to point that way, so I am thinking that it > is -- Greg -[ Registered Linux User#159346 * http://baratel.com/~greg/ ]- This Email may contain privileged information and remains the property of the author. You may not reveal the contents to anyone without the authors express authority to do so. ... If Bill Gates had a dime for every time a Windows box crashed... Oh, wait a minute, he already does. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
[SLUG] RE: Netcomm np1400
This is the way I feel it should be (not that I realy know anything about it) but logic seems to point that way, so I am thinking that it is my setup rather than the modem that is the problem, on the other hand, of the two "bridged" options the modem has (and I have tried both)rather than the fixed mut(1483), would not the transparent be easiest to use? -Original Message- From: Alexander Samad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 15 December 2004 9:58 AM To: Alan Millsted Subject: Re: Netcomm np1400 Yes can't check right now, but I am pretty sure that I do. I know I have pppoe running, as I spent a bit of time setting up multi default gateways. The key for TPG and for most ISP I presume is the 1843 ip llc, that should tell the modem to act purely as a bridge and not as a router or a adsl client once its in that mode you should be able to run the pppoe -d -i test to test the channel all the way to the exchange. Alex > "argh now I understand my confusion i have a nb1300plus" > > That make's a lot of difference. > > One last thing before I give this away and try a new line of attack, > do you have the "pid file" (/var/run/pppoe-adsl.pid.pppoe) refered to > in /sbin/adsl_start. > > Alan > > > -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
