tdukes@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
---- Robert Moskowitz <rgm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thomas Dukes wrote:
*From:* centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx]
*On Behalf Of *chloe K
*Sent:* Thursday, November 27, 2008 9:10 PM
*To:* CentOS mailing list
*Subject:* Re: Neighbour table overflow
what is your netmask?
eth0 = 255.255.240.0
Why do you have such a large subnet? There are a number of potential
performance problems with such a setup. I typically only see this in
large, bridged wireless campuses. Little justification for it in a
wired network. (I do have lots of networking experience and knowledge,
having consulted with a number of large deployments).
Even with a large subnet, you should not be arping everywhere. Either
two things are happening:
Your system is recording every ARP request it sees ('Who has IP
x.x.x.x') to avoid arping later. Bad behaviour (IMNSHO), given your
network.
Your system is ARPing for every IP address in the subnet to learn all of
its neighbors. WHy would it do that? Unless you have some snooping
software running on your system.
Hi Robert,
I did not set this value. Something did but not me.
I am on a roadrunner connection with a dynamic ip. What do you suggest I change it to?
You might not have much control over it if you are using DHCP.
route -n
will supply you with your router address. Once you now that and your
assigned IP address (and lease) you can use ifconfig to change your
netmask so that your router and you are in the same subnet.
What is the address also of your nameserver (/etc/resolv.conf) and mail
server? If these are also within that hugh subnet, your netmask has to
keep them 'local'.
Roadrunner.... hmm.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
