Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-15 Thread Jon Radel
Christer Solskogen wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# tcpdump -vvv -n -l -e arp tcpdump: listening on nfe0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes 08:58:46.337968 00:1d:60:36:34:a6 > ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype ARP (0x0806), length 60: arp who-has 192.168.0.3 tell 192.168.0.12 08:58:46.

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-15 Thread Christer Solskogen
Christian Walther wrote: I don't want to point you into the wrong direction, but is it possible that this arp entry is actually a sign of an ARP spoofing attempt? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARP_spoofing I suspect that, but I just want to know if might be something else. Do you run a wirel

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-15 Thread Christer Solskogen
Jon Radel wrote: to see what you can catch. First of all, thanks for taking time to help me on this. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# tcpdump -vvv -n -l -e arp tcpdump: listening on nfe0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes 08:58:46.337968 00:1d:60:36:34:a6 > ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertyp

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-14 Thread Derek Ragona
At 04:50 PM 5/14/2008, Christer Solskogen wrote: Derek Ragona wrote: I would do a traceroute from all your hosts there. When you do keep an eye out for the arp error message. This should help find the host causing these errors and then look at that systems configuration. Also do you have mor

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-14 Thread Jon Radel
Jon Radel wrote: Christer Solskogen wrote: Derek Ragona wrote: I would do a traceroute from all your hosts there. When you do keep an eye out for the arp error message. This should help find the host causing these errors and then look at that systems configuration. Also do you have more

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-14 Thread Jon Radel
Christer Solskogen wrote: Derek Ragona wrote: I would do a traceroute from all your hosts there. When you do keep an eye out for the arp error message. This should help find the host causing these errors and then look at that systems configuration. Also do you have more than one ethernet

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-14 Thread Christer Solskogen
Derek Ragona wrote: I would do a traceroute from all your hosts there. When you do keep an eye out for the arp error message. This should help find the host causing these errors and then look at that systems configuration. Also do you have more than one ethernet interface in the system show

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-14 Thread Derek Ragona
At 06:22 AM 5/14/2008, Christer Solskogen wrote: Derek Ragona wrote: Yes aliases should have a netmask of 255.255.255.255 Still no go. 192.168.0.255 is showing up in "arp -a" and netstat -rn. (and the "arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network" in /var/

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-14 Thread Christer Solskogen
Derek Ragona wrote: Yes aliases should have a netmask of 255.255.255.255 Still no go. 192.168.0.255 is showing up in "arp -a" and netstat -rn. (and the "arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network" in /var/log/messages) nfe0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-12 Thread Derek Ragona
At 03:44 PM 5/12/2008, Christer Solskogen wrote: Derek Ragona wrote: You may want to do traceroutes from the systems that do find the 0.0.0.0 interface. I would bet you have a default route and/or netmask sending the traffic. You will get those arp messages if you run two different interfac

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-12 Thread Christer Solskogen
Derek Ragona wrote: You may want to do traceroutes from the systems that do find the 0.0.0.0 interface. I would bet you have a default route and/or netmask sending the traffic. You will get those arp messages if you run two different interfaces on the same system, on the same subnet (not to

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-12 Thread Derek Ragona
At 12:55 PM 5/12/2008, Christer Solskogen wrote: Christer Solskogen wrote: Derek Ragona wrote: Sounds like you have 0.0.0.0 configured on an ethernet interface. I would check all your systems, and be sure it isn't used. I checked, and there is no interface with that ip address. But thanks fo

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-12 Thread Christer Solskogen
Christer Solskogen wrote: Derek Ragona wrote: Sounds like you have 0.0.0.0 configured on an ethernet interface. I would check all your systems, and be sure it isn't used. I checked, and there is no interface with that ip address. But thanks for the advice. OpenBSD box - where 0.0.0.0 i

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-12 Thread Christer Solskogen
Derek Ragona wrote: Sounds like you have 0.0.0.0 configured on an ethernet interface. I would check all your systems, and be sure it isn't used. I checked, and there is no interface with that ip address. But thanks for the advice. OpenBSD box - where 0.0.0.0 is resolving to. rl0: flags=

Re: arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-11 Thread Derek Ragona
At 03:39 PM 5/11/2008, Christer Solskogen wrote: Hi! I have been seeing a lot of warnings in syslog the last week. Do anyone have a tip for where to begin searching for the sinner? arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network

2008-05-11 Thread Christer Solskogen
Hi! I have been seeing a lot of warnings in syslog the last week. Do anyone have a tip for where to begin searching for the sinner? arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local