On 17/05/2023 18:01, cjohn...@serranosystems.com wrote:
Hi Marcus^2,
Thanks for taking a look at this.
Yes, I am using 10G interface, but you will notice my streaming
request was only at 200Mbps (via command —rate=200e6).
|eno1: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 inet
192.168.0.67 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.0.255 inet6
fe80::3eec:efff:fec2:4346 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20<link> ether
3c:ec:ef:c2:43:46 txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet) RX packets 16068286
bytes 7458604025 (7.4 GB) RX errors 0 dropped 113 overruns 0 frame
0 TX packets 11987991 bytes 3951547409 (3.9 GB) TX errors 0
dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0 eno2:
flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 9000 inet
192.168.30.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.30.255 inet6
fe80::3eec:efff:fec2:4347 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20<link> ether
3c:ec:ef:c2:43:47 txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet) RX packets 5544521276
bytes 44302674870930 (44.3 TB) RX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0
frame 0 TX packets 61549463 bytes 5108838143 (5.1 GB) TX errors 0
dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0 eno2:0:
flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 9000 inet
192.168.30.30 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.30.255 ether
3c:ec:ef:c2:43:47 txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet)|
You can add eno2:0 through this command “sudo ifconfig eno2:0
192.168.30.30 netmask 255.255.255.0 up”, but keep in mind if you
reboot you will lose it. tcpdump is promiscuous, so it would see any
traffic on 192.168.30.X network.
Point taken on rfnoc, but take a look at source is in
/uhlib/usrp/cores/xport_adapter_ctrl.hpp as you look for the other
error message “Device was unable to look up Ethernet (MAC)…”. You will
also notice the check for for an “arp” with a retry count of 3.
Thanks,
—Cy
I wonder (thinking out loud here) if the organization of the ARP table
in the X310 (2974 radio bit) is such that having two
different IP addys that resolve to the same MAC confuses it? It
shouldn't, because "proxy ARP" is a well-established
mechanism for routers.
I know the IP stack on the FPGA is "rudimentary" and would likely NOT be
compliant with the famous "Host Requirements"
document in any way, shape, or form.
_______________________________________________
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
