From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Mar 6 19:36:11 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA08249 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 19:36:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from phobos.illtel.denver.co.us (abelits@phobos.illtel.denver.co.us [207.33.75.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA08243 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 19:36:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (abelits@localhost) by phobos.illtel.denver.co.us (8.8.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id TAA25585; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 19:54:19 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 19:54:19 -0800 (PST) From: Alex Belits To: Jim Durham cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "Phantom IP address" In-Reply-To: <331F84EC.446B9B3D@w2xo.pgh.pa.us> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, 6 Mar 1997, Jim Durham wrote: > I am the "caretaker" of a small ISP hub in a suburban telephone > company's > calling area, connected to the "downtown" hub by a 56K line. > > The IP address of the router are 206.210.70.1, the portmaster is > 206.210.70.2. My FreeBSD boxes are .4 and .5, the Dos/Windows box is .6 > . > > The netmask I was using was fffffff8 on this box (.5). > > I wanted to add my new laptop as .7 . I tried pinging .7 > to see if anything was there. I got a reply! Looking at the ping > times, it was obvious (.8ms) that the echo was coming from the > local ethernet and not from the 56K link. It was also quicker > than the ping from the router, so it looked like it > was coming from the .5 box, running 2.1.6 . I did "netstat -nr" > and , sure enough, there was .7 with "Link #1" next to it. > I rebooted and checked again, and it was gone. Pinging .7 > would make it re-appear. Here's what it looked like.. > Nothing wrong, with netmask fffffff8 .7 will ping the subnet, so every box will answer. Why other boxes didn't answer? Is ping firewalled on them? -- Alex