Re: eth1 is dead

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Michael Weber wrote:
Hi, all.  I'm feeling REALLY dense right now.  I hope this is not a
"Duh!" kind of thing.

I have a Compaq desktop, D500, with 2 GHz P4, 512 Mb, etc. and an
onboard Intel NIC.  What I want to do is turn it inot a backup/test
firewall system.  So, I bought an Intel 100 Pro server NIC and installed
it.  When I install Fedora from the CD's all seems fine.  It finds the
NICs, assigns IP addresses, routes, etc. and everything is happy.

Until you try to use eth1.

I can ping the address just fine, but I cannot ping anything out of
that interface.  The other interface is fully operational.  If I ping
the interface from a known functional system, I get no returns.  Not
even an ARP response.
>
Here's what I've tried:

I tried three other NIC's, both Intel and 3Com.  I tried moving
interrupts around.  I swapped cables, switches, IP numbers, brands of
coffee.  (Hey, I was desperate!)

I tried a different machine, even tried a Dell GX115.

I tried a different driver, updated kernel, turning off everything in
the BIOS that a firewall wouldn't need (LPT, COMs, USB, etc.)

Nothing worked.  It acts like the NIC doesn't interrupt the processor.

Here are some sample outputs in hopes someone has seen this before.  I
tried Googling the symptoms and didn't see anything relevant.  Let me
know if you need to see anything else.

TIA!

-Michael

[root@fw-4 root]# iptables -L -n
Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT)
target     prot opt source               destination

Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT)
target     prot opt source               destination

Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT)
target     prot opt source               destination

Ok, no iptables.

[root@fw-4 root]# ping 172.16.30.32
PING 172.16.30.32 (172.16.30.32) 56(84) bytes of data.
From 172.16.30.25 icmp_seq=0 Destination Host Unreachable
From 172.16.30.25 icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Unreachable
From 172.16.30.25 icmp_seq=2 Destination Host Unreachable

--- 172.16.30.32 ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 0 received, +3 errors, 100% packet loss, time 5026ms

Usually indicative of a bad route.

, pipe 4
[root@fw-4 root]# ifconfig
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:02:B3:E7:65:F9
inet addr:66.136.128.237 Bcast:66.136.128.239 Mask:255.255.255.248
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:27293 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:20857 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:443 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:3436779 (3.2 Mb) TX bytes:1470496 (1.4 Mb)
Interrupt:5 Base address:0x1000 Memory:fc420000-fc420038


eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:08:02:A8:5A:83
inet addr:172.16.30.25 Bcast:172.16.255.255 Mask:255.255.0.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:12361 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:704 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:989444 (966.2 Kb) TX bytes:29568 (28.8 Kb)
Interrupt:10 Base address:0x1040 Memory:fc421000-fc421038


lo        Link encap:Local Loopback
          inet addr:127.0.0.1  Mask:255.0.0.0
          UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:16436  Metric:1
          RX packets:2532 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:2532 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
          RX bytes:1523935 (1.4 Mb)  TX bytes:1523935 (1.4 Mb)

Ok, so eth1 is on the same subnet as the ping target.

[root@fw-4 root]# more /proc/interrupts
           CPU0
  0:     629623          XT-PIC  timer
  1:       2730          XT-PIC  keyboard
  2:          0          XT-PIC  cascade
  5:      46836          XT-PIC  eth0
  8:          3          XT-PIC  rtc
 10:      13173          XT-PIC  eth1
 12:      63222          XT-PIC  PS/2 Mouse
 14:      57111          XT-PIC  ide0
 15:      49560          XT-PIC  ide1
NMI:          0
ERR:          0

dmesg output:
Linux version 2.4.22-1.2115.nptl (bhcompile@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) (gcc
version
3.2.3 20030422 (Red Hat Linux 3.2.3-6)) #1 Wed Oct 29 15:42:51 EST
2003
<snip>
Intel(R) PRO/100 Network Driver - version 2.3.18-k1
Copyright (c) 2003 Intel Corporation

PCI: Found IRQ 5 for device 02:04.0
divert: allocating divert_blk for eth0
e100: selftest OK.
e100: eth0: Intel(R) PRO/100 Network Connection
  Hardware receive checksums enabled
  cpu cycle saver enabled

PCI: Found IRQ 10 for device 02:08.0
divert: allocating divert_blk for eth1
e100: selftest OK.
e100: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/100 Network Connection
  Hardware receive checksums enabled

divert: freeing divert_blk for eth0
divert: freeing divert_blk for eth1
ip_tables: (C) 2000-2002 Netfilter core team
ip_conntrack version 2.1 (4095 buckets, 32760 max) - 292 bytes per
conntrack
Intel(R) PRO/100 Network Driver - version 2.3.18-k1
Copyright (c) 2003 Intel Corporation

PCI: Found IRQ 5 for device 02:04.0
divert: allocating divert_blk for eth0
e100: selftest OK.
e100: eth0: Intel(R) PRO/100 Network Connection
  Hardware receive checksums enabled
  cpu cycle saver enabled

PCI: Found IRQ 10 for device 02:08.0
divert: allocating divert_blk for eth1
e100: selftest OK.
e100: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/100 Network Connection
  Hardware receive checksums enabled

e100: eth0 NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Half duplex
e100: eth1 NIC Link is Up 10 Mbps Half duplex

Nothing there.

I'd recommend "traceroute 172.16.30.32" and verify that the ping is
indeed going out eth1.  Also, give us the output of "netstat -rn"
(your routing tables).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Senior Systems Engineer     rstevens@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -
- VitalStream, Inc.                       http://www.vitalstream.com -
-                                                                    -
-                 All generalizations are false.                     -
----------------------------------------------------------------------




[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux