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

Re: howto isolate 2 nics?

On Friday 22 September 2006 14:00, Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
>Gene Heskett wrote:
>> I got this back, but I'll sanitze the outside addresses to protect the
>> guilty. :-)
>> ----------  Forwarded Message  ----------
>> Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: howto isolate 2 nics?
>> Date: Friday 22 September 2006 13:20
>> From: Jim Hines <jhines wdtv com>
>> To: Gene Heskett <gene heskett verizon net>
>>> Please post the results of route -n and ifconfig -a.  It sounds like
>>> you may have a default route issue.
>>> Bob...
>> route -n
>> Kernel IP routing table
>> Destination  Gateway      Genmask      Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
>> 66.xx.xx.xx U     0      0        0 eth0
>>   U     0      0        0 eth1
>>     U     0      0        0 eth1
>>       U     0      0        0 lo
>>         UG    0      0        0 eth1
>> ifconfig -a
>> eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:A0:CC:5F:7C:6B
>>            inet addr:66.xx.xx.xx  Bcast:66.xx.xx.xx
>> Metric:1 RX packets:16990702 errors:1 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX
>> packets:8227520 errors:3 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:3 collisions:0
>> txqueuelen:100
>>            RX bytes:3080066568 (2937.3 Mb)  TX bytes:1206913340 (1151.0
>>  Mb) Interrupt:5 Base address:0x9000
>> eth1      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:50:DA:B4:0E:93
>>            inet addr:  Bcast: 
>>            RX packets:62903099 errors:1 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:1
>>            TX packets:58704388 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>>            collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
>>            RX bytes:1244767257 (1187.1 Mb)  TX bytes:3080714873 (2937.9
>>  Mb) Interrupt:12 Base address:0xd800
>> lo        Link encap:Local Loopback
>>            inet addr:  Mask:
>>            UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:16436  Metric:1
>>            RX packets:2274417 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
>>            TX packets:2274417 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>>            collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
>>            RX bytes:450462974 (429.5 Mb)  TX bytes:450462974 (429.5 Mb)
>The default route is through eth1 with a gateway of It
>should be through eth0 with what ever gateway address is provided by
>the ISP.

And then the local machines servers are not usable at the local address 
using the local version of its FQDN, so this isn't a working option.

>This is why traffic for the Internet, that should go out 
>eth0, is going out eth1. It looks like the default route was set the
>way it was in order to get to the network through
> instead of providing a proper route to that network. If
>this is the case, then what is needed instead is a route specificity
>for using as the gateway.
The 169 address is a red herring, that like 3 day old fish, should be 
thrown out.  Its a redhat/fedora artifact I believe, for what useage I 
have no idea.  All I know is its there on every fedora machine since about 
FC3 or 4, my lappy FC5 has it, and it is not setup in any config file 
anyplace.  And it is not part of any network or subnet at that site.

I think we're losing track of the real problem by being distracted by the 
169 address.  We'd kill it if we knew how to do it.

Thanks, Mikkel
>  Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
>for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!

Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2006 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.

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