You will need to reconfigured the static IP.
The old ifcfg* scripts finally got removed I think, something I
upgraded broke about that time, and now NetworkManager Drools.
On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 5:45 AM wrote:
>
> I recently upgraded f40->f42.
>
> I have a server with two interfaces, eth1 has in
On 06.06.2025 20:45 fed...@eyal.emu.id.au fed...@eyal.emu.id.au wrote:
> When I boot the system (switch off) eth0 does not get an IP. Until
> f40 it did get a static IP.
Why should it get one if the interface is down?
If it goes up, the NetworkManager should handle IP addressing. Use that
instead
On 3/12/23 12:17, Roger Heflin wrote:
I cannot log in, but the menu offered by the modem does not show any relevant
settings.
You might also test a device on wifi and/or login to the router and
send a test ping from inside the router with a large size.
WiFi is turned off on the modem, but
>
> I cannot log in, but the menu offered by the modem does not show any relevant
> settings.
>
> > You might also test a device on wifi and/or login to the router and
> > send a test ping from inside the router with a large size.
>
> WiFi is turned off on the modem, but I might give it a try.
>
>
On 3/12/23 11:30, Roger Heflin wrote:
On Sat, Dec 2, 2023 at 3:16 PM wrote:
On 3/12/23 00:43, Roger Heflin wrote:
My experience with the MTU being wrong is that often nothing works to
inform the sending end that the MTU is wrong.
The MTU being wrong (and below 1500) is not an expected/handle
On 3/12/23 03:47, Markus Schönhaber wrote:
02.12.23, 14:27 +0100, fed...@eyal.emu.id.au:
I did not do any change to the firewall, which is probably the only place
I could break things (like dropping ICMP).
The modem has a feature "IPv4 SPI Firewall" and turning it off did not
help here.
Well,
On Sat, Dec 2, 2023 at 3:16 PM wrote:
>
> On 3/12/23 00:43, Roger Heflin wrote:
> > My experience with the MTU being wrong is that often nothing works to
> > inform the sending end that the MTU is wrong.
> >
> > The MTU being wrong (and below 1500) is not an expected/handled
> > condition for the
On 3/12/23 00:43, Roger Heflin wrote:
My experience with the MTU being wrong is that often nothing works to
inform the sending end that the MTU is wrong.
The MTU being wrong (and below 1500) is not an expected/handled
condition for the TCP stack. meaning it will break for anything that
uses a M
02.12.23, 14:27 +0100, fed...@eyal.emu.id.au:
> I did not do any change to the firewall, which is probably the only place
> I could break things (like dropping ICMP).
> The modem has a feature "IPv4 SPI Firewall" and turning it off did not
> help here.
Well, I'm out of ideas, then.
> Anyway, if
A few bytes or more less than any advertised.
The underlying issue is that I advertise say 1500bytes MTU (when asked
or when fragmenting) but only allow say 1496 to actually pass.
Usually when I have seen it happen it has been a switch that has an
enforced MTU limit set, but it could be any devic
My experience with the MTU being wrong is that often nothing works to
inform the sending end that the MTU is wrong.
The MTU being wrong (and below 1500) is not an expected/handled
condition for the TCP stack. meaning it will break for anything that
uses a MTU above the size, especially if the wro
There is nothing wrong with leaving the mtu lower. At worst you need
one more packet.
Knowing hardware providers and internet providers. "no one else is
reporting this" means we have not noticed that anyone else reported
this, and/or there are only 2 others using this and/or we have not put
tog
On 2/12/23 23:01, Markus Schönhaber wrote:
02.12.23, 11:33 +0100, fed...@eyal.emu.id.au:
For the last few weeks I am trying to pinpoint the source of a network
problem.
The short story: using the standard mtu of 1500 caused sending to stall
(and fail).
This is seen when uploading a file (e.g.
02.12.23, 11:33 +0100, fed...@eyal.emu.id.au:
> For the last few weeks I am trying to pinpoint the source of a network
> problem.
>
> The short story: using the standard mtu of 1500 caused sending to stall
> (and fail).
> This is seen when uploading a file (e.g. ftp) or when sending email.
> With
> On 5. Nov 2020, at 03:17, Jonathan Billings wrote:
>
> On Nov 4, 2020, at 18:39, Roger Heflin wrote:
>>
>> Typically if you want put 3 ip addresses in the same subnet on a
>> network usually you use a single network adaptor and add extra VIPs on
>> it.
>>
>> see:
>> https://www.jamescoyle
On Nov 4, 2020, at 18:39, Roger Heflin wrote:
>
> Typically if you want put 3 ip addresses in the same subnet on a
> network usually you use a single network adaptor and add extra VIPs on
> it.
>
> see:
> https://www.jamescoyle.net/how-to/307-create-a-virtual-ip-address-in-linux
>
> eth0:1 fo
Typically if you want put 3 ip addresses in the same subnet on a
network usually you use a single network adaptor and add extra VIPs on
it.
see: https://www.jamescoyle.net/how-to/307-create-a-virtual-ip-address-in-linux
eth0:1 for the device names it the 1st vip, :1 as the 2nd vip and so
on. Th
On 11/4/20 6:16 AM, Scott van Looy via users wrote:
So on startup, all 3 appear to be working and have IPs assigned according to
ifconfig, but...
.215 accepts pings, .216 and .217 do not
https://access.redhat.com/solutions/53031
reverse path filtering is on by default, and in that configur
On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:16:02 +0100
Scott van Looy via users wrote:
> It’s super frustrating. Does anyone have any ideas why this might happen or
> what could be causing it or any suggestions for what I can investigate?
I have absolutely no idea if this is the problem, but I know
when I setup an e
On 12/11/2014 10:56 AM, Bill Oliver wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2014, Tim wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2014-12-10 at 15:06 +, Bill Oliver wrote:
>>> Over the past few weeks, basically since I moved to Fedora21, there
>>> are extended periods where I simply cannot get to web pages using
>>> http. Things wil
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014, Tim wrote:
On Wed, 2014-12-10 at 15:06 +, Bill Oliver wrote:
Over the past few weeks, basically since I moved to Fedora21, there
are extended periods where I simply cannot get to web pages using
http. Things will work fine for hours, and then stop for hours, and
then c
On Wed, 2014-12-10 at 15:06 +, Bill Oliver wrote:
> Over the past few weeks, basically since I moved to Fedora21, there
> are extended periods where I simply cannot get to web pages using
> http. Things will work fine for hours, and then stop for hours, and
> then come back up.
>
> During th
192.168.114.1 is gateway? it should have at least static route for
193.204.165.0/24 network over 192.168.114.60 interface.
On 4 July 2012 14:04, Tiziana Manfroni wrote:
>
>> For the system with IP address 192.168.114.30 what is the output of
>> netstat -nr ?
>>
>
> Kernel IP routing table
> Dest
I forward network packets to the same network interface from where it came from
using utility ip.
Thanks a lot.
Tiziana
/ / \ Tiziana Manfroni
/ / /\ \ Dipartimento di Matematica
/ / /\ \ \
On 07/04/2012 08:04 PM, Tiziana Manfroni wrote:
>> For the system with IP address 192.168.114.30 what is the output of netstat
>> -nr ?
>
> Kernel IP routing table
> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse Iface
> 192.168.114.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U
On 04. juli 2012 14:04, Tiziana Manfroni wrote:
For the system with IP address 192.168.114.30 what is the output of
netstat -nr ?
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse
Iface
192.168.114.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0
For the system with IP address 192.168.114.30 what is the output of netstat -nr
?
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse
Iface
192.168.114.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 00
eth0
169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0
On 07/04/2012 07:20 PM, Tiziana Manfroni wrote:
> Hi, I have a server with two card network, one in public network
> (193.204.165.*)
> and other in private network(192.168.114.*).
> When I connect from host on public network (193.204.165.*) or another private
> network (192.168.115.) to server it'
28 matches
Mail list logo
