howto isolate 2 nics?
Tod Merley
todbot88 at gmail.com
Fri Sep 22 18:41:36 UTC 2006
On 9/22/06, Mikkel L. Ellertson <mikkel at infinity-ltd.com> 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 at wdtv.com>
> > To: Gene Heskett <gene.heskett at 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 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.240 U 0 0 0 eth0
> > 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
> > 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
> > 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
> > 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.12 0.0.0.0 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
> > Mask:255.255.255.240 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 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:192.168.1.3 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
> > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
> > 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:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
> > 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 192.168.1.12. It
> should be through eth0 with what ever gateway address is provided by
> the ISP. This is why traffic for the Internet, that should g out
> eth0, is going out eth1. It looks like the default route was set the
> way it was in order to get to the 169.254.0.0 network through
> 192.168.1.12 instead of providing a proper route to that network. If
> this is the case, then what is needed instead is a route specificity
> for 169.254.0.0 using 192.168.1.12 as the gateway.
>
> Mikkel
> --
>
> Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
> for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>
Hi Mikkel!
Just wondering. The IP 169.254.0.0 looks a bit strange (I thought .0
was not allowed or represented some kind of broadcast. Also the
address when "whois"ed references RFC 3330 and there I find it
mentioned as:
169.254.0.0/16 - This is the "link local" block. It is allocated for
communication between hosts on a single link. Hosts obtain these
addresses by auto-configuration, such as when a DHCP server may not be
found.
My thinking when I saw it is that it is part of Zeroconf - which I
simply do not understand. I would think that if he sets the network
up by hand or by using DHCP on the local network from his mentioned
machine the reference to 169.254.0.0/16 becomes moot.
Thanks!
Tod
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list