![]() |
|
|
#34 |
|
If I May
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados
230038 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
103·113 Posts |
PING 172.16.1.1 (172.16.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. [rapidly alternating ._ ascii char-field here, until I ^Ced it] --- 172.16.1.1 ping statistics --- 24387 packets transmitted, 24387 packets received, 0% packet loss, time 7970ms [added packet-stats-foo snipped] |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Sep 2002
Database er0rr
3,739 Posts |
On the Debian Haswell box using the menus try going into: system-->preferences-->Network Connections
highlight the "wired connection" click on the "edit" button choose the ipv4 tab make sure the address is 192.168.1.102 and the mask is 255.255.255.0 click on "apply" On the MacBook: Code:
ping 192.168.1.102 Last fiddled with by paulunderwood on 2013-06-29 at 23:06 |
|
|
|
|
|
#37 | |
|
If I May
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados
37·263 Posts |
Quote:
You've just "made friends" with 172.16.1.1. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#38 | ||
|
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
103×113 Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
Still don't understand why ifconfig is showing the 172-address, not the 192-one I have in my interfaces file. {Maybe you explained it in your IPv4 note, but I need it in English.] |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Apr 2010
Over the rainbow
23·52·13 Posts |
it may help :
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5735 |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 | |
|
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
103×113 Posts |
Quote:
Fuck me - had a perfectly good working local-ethernet setup, even with new mobo and network card it should need at most a few file edits and reboot to get this working. Now I'm looking at 20-page "Special Use IPv4 Addresses" specs. I do see this snip in the spec, though: 192.168.0.0/16 - This block is set aside for use in private networks. Its intended use is documented in [RFC1918]. As described in that RFC, addresses within this block do not legitimately appear on the public Internet. These addresses can be used without any coordination with IANA or an Internet registry. Yeah - that's the one I want. Where in the hell did it go? Is it being obfuscated by the 172-one? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
103×113 Posts |
Signing off for today ... thx again for your generous willingness to help, all.
But if I don't get at least some real (coding) work done today I'm gonna be really annoyed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Sep 2002
Database er0rr
3,739 Posts |
To get it back do:
Code:
ifconfig eth0 192.168.1.102 ifconfig eth0 up Last fiddled with by paulunderwood on 2013-06-29 at 23:26 |
|
|
|
|
|
#43 | |
|
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
101101011101112 Posts |
Quote:
Thanks for all the help, folks! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#44 | |
|
Sep 2002
Database er0rr
72338 Posts |
Quote:
![]() Perhaps a small shim jammed in with the plug would solve the NIC socket problem, as long as you do not prevent contact. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Increase in RAM requirement soon? | Jwb52z | PrimeNet | 4 | 2013-05-24 09:42 |
| power consumption | esakertt | Hardware | 1 | 2012-10-09 20:19 |
| Networking help | Prime95 | Hardware | 18 | 2011-05-29 22:16 |
| Power consumption | dans | Hardware | 7 | 2004-06-06 15:15 |
| Power consumption | optim | Hardware | 8 | 2003-12-06 04:13 |