Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.7 eth0, eth1 and arpwatch flip flops

2013-01-04 Thread Gavin Henry
Couldn't get this to work so had to disable it. On 26 December 2012 19:47, Gavin Henry wrote: > First things first... Can you confirm that those are still the values in >> place? >> >> cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth0/arp_filter >> cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth0/arp_ignore >> cat /proc/sys/net

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.7 eth0, eth1 and arpwatch flip flops

2012-12-26 Thread Gavin Henry
First things first... Can you confirm that those are still the values in > place? > > cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth0/arp_filter > cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth0/arp_ignore > cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth1/arp_filter > cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth1/arp_ignore > cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.7 eth0, eth1 and arpwatch flip flops

2012-12-26 Thread Gavin Henry
> Most of 169/8 is, but presumably he meant 169.254.0.0/16. > >> The only "non-routable" (i.e. reserved for private networks) IP blocks are: > > The list is slightly longer than that: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserved_IP_addresses#Reserved_IPv4_addresses No, Mike was right. 169.x.x.x which i

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.7 eth0, eth1 and arpwatch flip flops

2012-12-26 Thread Gavin Henry
>> We're having to shut eth1 down and bring it up for sync at night. > > To what type of equipment are your ethernet devices connected? I'm asking now. > Are they > both connected to the same device? Same VLAN, not sure about same device yet. Checking. > I've seen some devices (particularly > 2

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.7 eth0, eth1 and arpwatch flip flops

2012-12-26 Thread SilverTip257
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Mike Burger wrote: > > > On 12/26/2012 04:33 AM, Mike Burger wrote: > >> 169.xxx.xxx.xxx is most certainly a "routable" IP block, as far as > >> internet standards go. > > > > Most of 169/8 is, but presumably he meant 169.254.0.0/16. > > > >> The only "non-routabl

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.7 eth0, eth1 and arpwatch flip flops

2012-12-26 Thread Mike Burger
> On 12/26/2012 04:33 AM, Mike Burger wrote: >> 169.xxx.xxx.xxx is most certainly a "routable" IP block, as far as >> internet standards go. > > Most of 169/8 is, but presumably he meant 169.254.0.0/16. > >> The only "non-routable" (i.e. reserved for private networks) IP blocks >> are: > > The lis

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.7 eth0, eth1 and arpwatch flip flops

2012-12-26 Thread Gordon Messmer
On 12/26/2012 04:33 AM, Mike Burger wrote: > 169.xxx.xxx.xxx is most certainly a "routable" IP block, as far as > internet standards go. Most of 169/8 is, but presumably he meant 169.254.0.0/16. > The only "non-routable" (i.e. reserved for private networks) IP blocks are: The list is slightly lo

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.7 eth0, eth1 and arpwatch flip flops

2012-12-26 Thread Gordon Messmer
On 12/26/2012 02:06 AM, Gavin Henry wrote: > # For the dual interface - 06.12.12 > net.ipv4.conf.eth0.arp_filter = 1 > net.ipv4.conf.eth0.arp_ignore = 1 > net.ipv4.conf.eth1.arp_filter = 1 > net.ipv4.conf.eth1.arp_ignore = 1 > net.ipv4.conf.all.arp_filter = 1 First things first... Can you confirm

Re: [CentOS] CentOS 5.7 eth0, eth1 and arpwatch flip flops

2012-12-26 Thread Mike Burger
-- Mike Burger http://www.bubbanfriends.org "It's always suicide-mission this, save-the-planet that. No one ever just stops by to say 'hi' anymore." --Colonel Jack O'Neill, SG1 > Dear all, > > Has anyone experienced this whilst running DRBD over eth1 between two > CentOS 5.7 servers? > > eth1