From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Apr 23 23:04:58 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id XAA23466 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 23:04:58 -0700 Received: from husc7.harvard.edu (husc7.harvard.edu [140.247.30.37]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id XAA23460 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 23:04:55 -0700 Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 02:01:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Sir Ilya Tsymbal Reply-To: Sir Ilya Tsymbal Subject: Re: install problem with 3c509. What to do? To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <20807.798696597@freefall.cdrom.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > And then I get an error: : gethostbyname error > > (2):hostname lookup failure. > > There's where it fails in its attempt to look up the remote hostname. > > Truly, your problem is either: > > 1. You ethernet card isn't actually working properly. I'd drop into a shell, > type `ifconfig ep0' to see if it's up, perhaps try and ping the gateway. > If that works, then you know it's not the card. I did that. It appears to work properly. I got: ep0: flags=863 mtu 1500 inet 140.247.147.81 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 140.247.147.255 ether 00:20:af:11:98 these settings are all correct for my card - all the numbers I got from local netadmin for my computer. So I assume it's not the card itself that is causing the problem. > 2. Your gateway isn't passing your packets for some reason. This could > be some sort of configuration error on their end. Try and see if you > can ping any sites on the other side of the gateway and, of course, the > name server itself. > Well, here is what happens: I try ping, and I get: Ping: wrote , 64 chars, ret=-1 Ping: sendto: no route to host Then at the end, packet loss = 100%. I tried to ping the gateway from another machine, and it reports it up. I tried pinging my machine from even the same subnet and it's down. So, it seems I can't even get to the gateway itself... Hmmm.. Do you have any ideas? > 3. Something is truly wrong with the name server, though this is the least > likely scenario. I don't think that is the problem. I ping'ed it and it's up, I also tried another Name server, same problem. ( I pinged it from another machine) Thanks again, Ilya Tsymbal