Re: Network entanglement

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 13/05/2021 01:08, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
On 5/12/21 12:39 PM, Mike Wright wrote:
On 5/12/21 9:14 AM, Robert McBroom via users wrote:
On 5/11/21 12:52 AM, Robert McBroom via users wrote:

fe80::210:75ff:fe28:5e30 Trying this one

ping fe80::210:75ff:fe28:5e30

ping6
_______________________________________________

Same on f33, but both work from as Windows 10 system


ping6 fe80::210:75ff:fe28:5e30
PING fe80::210:75ff:fe28:5e30(fe80::210:75ff:fe28:5e30) 56 data bytes
ping: sendmsg: Invalid argument
ping: sendmsg: Invalid argument
ping: sendmsg: Invalid argument
ping: sendmsg: Invalid argument
ping: sendmsg: Invalid argument


I am only awake for a few moments to answer that particular question.

The fe80....  addresses are "link-local" addresses.  They are non-routeable.
You need to tell the ping command on what interface that address is valid/reachable.

For example.  My system (meimei) has 5 interfaces.  A remote system (nas) has
2 interfaces.  One of nas's link-local addresses is fe80::211:32ff:feb8:6b41.
I need to know which physical link is common to meimei and nas.  I know this
to be enp2s0 on meimei.  So the format of the ping6 command would be

[egreshko@meimei ~]$ ping6 fe80::211:32ff:feb8:6b41%enp2s0
PING fe80::211:32ff:feb8:6b41%enp2s0(fe80::211:32ff:feb8:6b41%enp2s0) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from fe80::211:32ff:feb8:6b41%enp2s0: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.173 ms
64 bytes from fe80::211:32ff:feb8:6b41%enp2s0: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.178 ms
64 bytes from fe80::211:32ff:feb8:6b41%enp2s0: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.211 ms

As for you IPv4 issue......

It doesn't make sense to me at the moment since I still don't have a clear picture of your
network topology.  If all your systems are on the same LAN the connection between the host
from which the ping command is issued should go direct to the target.

When you ping 192.168.1.112 from a system (you've not revealed local system IP) there should
be no mention of another system.  Yet, it would seem that 192.168.1.185 is somehow physically
between the 2 systems and is informing you that it can't/won't route to the endpoint.

--
Remind me to ignore comments which aren't germane to the thread.

_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure



[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [EPEL Devel]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux