-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > -----Original Message----- > From: John Johnson [mailto:ioann@cais.com] ... > > -----Original Message----- > > From: John Johnson [mailto:ioann@cais.com] > > ... > This demonstrates the network seems ok. Thus we should not > consider defaults in the gateway (.1). > ... > > the Web from this box.) I've configured networking, giving this > > box 192.168.0.2, and I tried using my gateway's IP address. When > > I try to ping > > the gateway machine, I get Destination Unreachable messages. > ... > ? > This way we're assured your eth0 is ON and not defective, since > further information provided by you states the route-table seems > ok. > > Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 10:14 PM > To: 'DEMERRE DIETER'; linux-net@vger.rutgers.edu > Subject: RE: > > Can *you* please shed some light by throwing me a glimpse on the > output of > > /sbin/ifconfig > > Sure thing; ifconfig for eth0 follows: > > eth0 Link encap:Ethernet Hwaddr 00:A0:CC:5F:CF:6E > inet addr:192.168.0.2 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 > RX packets:283 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 > TX packets:48 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > collisions:0 txpueuelen:100 > Interrupt:5 Base address:0xf800 So indeed, I cannot see what could be the problem, but is it possible that the .2 machine runs on 100 and the two others on 10 Mb ? or the inverse ? If not, I can't discover the flaw ******* Groetjes vanwege ***** Greetings From ******* Dieter Demerre - http://www.angelfire.com/de/ddemerre ddemerre@acm.org - ext.dieter.demerre@siemens.be -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> iQA/AwUBOWGrOglG34XnM6kpEQKuNgCg1vwMr7kYa29KMFlPsLBqKr0DOMIAnjTa 438o0NpwnlOM5LTc9LXuLZ1W =KNVi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
