Hi,
i have both adapters on the same network segment, ie, i have a 10/100 hub..
ifconfig says:
eth0 inet addr: 139.95.71.20 Bcast: 139.95.71.255 Mask: 255.255.255.0
Interrupt: 10
eth1 inet addr: 139.95.71.40 Bcast: 139.95.71.255 Mask: 255.255.255.0
Interrupt: 9
but, route -n is what worries me as eth1 details are not proper.. it
says..
Destination Genmask Flags Iface
139.95.71.20 255.255.255.255 UH eth0
139.95.71.0 255.255.255.0 U eth0
139.95.71.0 255.255.255.0 U eth1
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U lo
thanx
HV
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kyle Hargraves [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 8:37 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: TCP/IP problem with multiple adapters
>
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have 2 Ehternet controllers on slots say 1 & 2 with IP Addresses
> > 139.95.26.20 & 139.95.26.40 respectively. I start ping sessions from
> each
> > one of the adapters to another machine (with IP Addr say 139.95.26.60).
> As
> > long the cable on Slot 1 remains connected, both ping perfectly. But
> once
> > this cable is removed, both ping sessions stall!! Does this mean that
> the
> > traffic is going out on the wire only thru' the adapter on Slot 1??
> >
> no. In fact, strictly, the pc is not pinged; merely the interface
>
> I'd have to know a bit more about your setup; for example, are the
> CAT 5 (???) leads run from the same shared media to the interfaces
> ..26.20 & ..26.40 ?
>
> Rather than use up two NICs what about putting the two ips on the
> same card - if you have a reason for needing a unit with two ips
>
> cheers,
>
> Kyle Hargraves
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Redhat-list mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
