> I don't suppose things are breaking at about the same time
> all of the machines renew their DHCP leases, are they?
Each has a statically assigned address - no DHCP in play.
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail
Admittedly there is WAY too much blood in my caffeine stream at the
moment but ...
According to your email describing the wireshark trace, the client sends
a request, times out, retransmits, times out, and errors out; but the
server sees the request, replies, sees the retransmit, and replys as
wel
> The client isn't seeing the replies? Blame the router, blame
> the router!
Heh. I'd love to, and I just acquired a brand new switch to use as
an experimental replacement for the one currently deployed. I'll be
ecstatic if that fixes thing, though I'm not optimistic.
I don't really trust my
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Michael ODonnell
wrote:
> Heh. I'd love to, and I just acquired a brand new switch to use as
> an experimental replacement for the one currently deployed. I'll be
> ecstatic if that fixes thing, though I'm not optimistic.
Me neither, but I suspect that's a goo
> Where/how are you running Wireshark? I would suggest running it
> on the NFS client, on the NFS server, and on a third computer
> monitoring the link.
I'm capturing dumps of Enet traffic on the client and server boxes at
a remote customer site thus:
dumpcap -i eth0 -w /tmp/`hostname`.pcap
>> The client isn't seeing the replies? Blame the router, blame
>> the router!
>
>Heh. I'd love to, and I just acquired a brand new switch to use as
>an experimental replacement for the one currently deployed. I'll be
>ecstatic if that fixes thing, though I'm not optimistic.
>From your last no
