From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Mar 9 19:32:25 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA02407 for questions-outgoing; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 19:32:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from obiwan.aceonline.com.au (obiwan.aceonline.com.au [203.103.90.67]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA02402 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 19:32:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (adrian@localhost) by obiwan.aceonline.com.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA24858; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 17:35:11 +0800 (WST) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 17:35:10 +0800 (WST) From: Adrian Chadd To: Mike Holling cc: questions@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: PLIP between FreeBSD and Linux? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk When you bring up interfaces in Linux it doesn't actually add routes for them. So try this : route add -host gw plip0 on the linux box. Cya. Adrian. On Sun, 9 Mar 1997, Mike Holling wrote: > I've been using PLIP (parallel cable IP) between FreeBSD boxes > happily for a while. Now I have a Linux notebook I'd like to hook to my > desktop FreeBSD box via PLIP. The desktop box is 2.1.0. I swiped > 'lpt.c' from the 2.1.7 distribution (which, according to the comments, > now has a Linux compatability mode) and made a new kernel. Doing > something like > > ifconfig lp0 link0 10.0.0.1 10.0.0.2 > > doesn't do the trick. Looking at the "plip" device on the Linux box I > can see the "packets received" count going up, matching the pings I'm > sending from the FreeBSD box. However, the pings are never successfully > returned. The same notebook running FreeBSD worked fine, so it's not a > hardware problem. I'm pretty new with linux, do I need to do anything > more than > > ifconfig plip1 pointopoint 10.0.0.1 10.0.0.2 > > to get it running? The linux box doesn't seem to recognize the plip > device as functional, I can neither send pings to the FreeBSD box (no > route to host) or add a route. Still, since the "packets received" > counter is going up *something* seems to be happening... > > - Mike > >