Problem configuring network
Anne Wilson
cannewilson at googlemail.com
Tue Apr 10 21:10:37 UTC 2007
On Tuesday 10 April 2007, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2007, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > On Tuesday 10 April 2007 20:11, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> >> On Tue, 10 Apr 2007, Anne Wilson wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday 10 April 2007, Tim wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, 2007-04-10 at 11:08 -0700, Knute Johnson wrote:
> >>>>> I've got an FC6 box that I'm having some trouble getting the network
> >>>>> configured correctly. I keep getting the error below when eth0 is
> >>>>> started. This happens on reboot or if I attempt to restart the
> >>>>> network.
> >>>>> Networking works but I keep getting the error message. Any ideas
> >>>>> where I've gone wrong?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [root at knute knute]# /sbin/service network restart
> >>>>> Shutting down interface eth0: [ OK ]
> >>>>> Shutting down loopback interface: [ OK ]
> >>>>> SIOCGIFFLAGS: No such device
> >>>>> Bringing up loopback interface: [ OK ]
> >>>>> Bringing up interface eth0: sysfs class device: Permission denied
> >>>>> Error, some other host already uses address 192.168.3.5.
> >>>>> [FAILED]
> >>>>
> >>>> Taking the error notice at face value, you've got some other device on
> >>>> the same network already using that address. You can't do that, and
> >>>> it checks when attempting to bring an interface on-line. Change one
> >>>> of them.
> >>>
> >>> Maybe something on the network grabbed the address via dhcp?
> >>
> >> Maybe Tim should be getting *his* IP via DHCP?
> >
> > Maybe, but not necessarily. It's possible to have both on one LAN. On
> > this LAN, for instance, we prefer to use static IP. All our boxes have
> > static addresses. However one work laptop needs dhcp to access a company
> > network. We tell the router to reserve the addresses that we use
> > statically, and it issues addresses outside those to a dhcp box.
>
> Sure, that's reasonable. But a common cause of duplicate addresses is
> attempting to assign onesself an address manually from a range managed by
> a DHCP server. My impression is that it is becoming more common to manage
> large networks with DHCP even when the machines are on the networks
> permanently, just because the centralized management is simpler for the
> admin.
>
Then again, some of the cheaper routers don't allow you to reserve addresses,
which makes it very dubious to have mixed static and dhcp on such a LAN.
Anne
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list