On Fri, 14 May 1999, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> From: Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Ethernet newbee failure
>
> I have added Ethernet cards to two machines, one my Linux box, the other
> my partner's Win'95 machine. To reduce the configuration problem
> "Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dale> Thanks to Tony Mancill for pointing out:
Dale> http://cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov/linux/setup/3c5x9setup.html
Dale> The 3c5x9setup program takes the 509 out of PnP mode and lets
Dale> you set the base and IRQ addresses and write them into th
Thanks to Tony Mancill for pointing out:
http://cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov/linux/setup/3c5x9setup.html
The 3c5x9setup program takes the 509 out of PnP mode and lets you set the
base and IRQ addresses and write them into the eeprom.
I set the card using 3c5x9setup to the base address 300 and IRQ 10 and
>> First I want to thank everyone who sent me a reply, both private and on
>> the list. I now know 3 different way to create working routing tables.
>> With regret, this has not resolved the problem. It was John Hasler who
>> actually resolved things for me. I now have the following routing tables
> "Dale" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dale> The NICs are EtherLink III cards connected through a hub
Dale> using twisted pair cable.
Two idle questions: are you sure you have straight-through cables,
have you tried directly connecting the machines to each other with a
cr
First I want to thank everyone who sent me a reply, both private and on
the list. I now know 3 different way to create working routing tables.
With regret, this has not resolved the problem. It was John Hasler who
actually resolved things for me. I now have the following routing tables
on both mach
> route add -host 10.1.1.10 dev eth0
> route add -host 10.1.1.20 dev eth0
>
> on both machines, the ping still doesn't work, but I get the PKT light on
> the hub to blink in time with the pings. This seems to indicate that the
> hardware is "doing the right thing". I still think there is something
>> "DS" == Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DS> Machine one is 10.1.1.10 and machine two is 10.1.1.20.
I believe the problem is you netmask.
Try
ifconfig eth0 10.1.1.10 netmask 255.255.255.0
route add -net 10.1.1.0
and .20 on the other maschine. You could use tcpdump to watch the
traf
On 14 May 1999, John Hasler wrote:
> Dale Scheetz writes:
> > The only thing that looks strange here is the Bcast: and Mask:, but I
> > didn't set them. It isn't clear that this is the failure either.
>
> The ifconfig output looks fine. What does 'route -n' say?
I have had several suggestions,
Dale Scheetz writes:
> The only thing that looks strange here is the Bcast: and Mask:, but I
> didn't set them. It isn't clear that this is the failure either.
The ifconfig output looks fine. What does 'route -n' say?
--
John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain.
[EMAIL PRO
10 matches
Mail list logo
