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

Re: ntpq no longer working -



Tim:
>> According to that diagram you have two devices with the same IP on the
>> same network (the router and box 1), that can't work.  Change one of
>> them.  Not sure which?  A common practice is to have a .254 ending
>> address for routers (e.g. 192.168.1.254), though it's not a requirement.

Bob Goodwin:
> The diagram was an artifact from the beginning of this effort about a 
> month ago which I did not update accurately.  I have refined it somewhat, it may 
> not be perfect but it's pretty close to what I have now:
> 
> http://users.wildblue.net/bobgoodwin/RF-Link.png

Now you have a device with a .255 ending address.  That's a broadcast
address, which is an entirely different thing than what wireless does,
it's a networking issue.  e.g. ping 192.168.1.255 should ping everything
on the LAN, and everything should respond back.  Some things will treat
a .255 address as a broadcast one, other things won't; it can be a cause
for strange problems.

 
> Ntp is working normally since I corrected the spelling error
> in /etc/hosts.  I am accustomed to seeing  much lower delays, on the
> order of 160 ms, and better offsets, usually near 1 ms, but it is
> working and I don't think I need such great accuracy.  I believe
> I am limited by the system delays through Wildblue.  Transit time to
> and from the satellite must be on the order of a quarter of a second
> in addition to various other system delays?

Satellite internet does introduce bigger delays, there is a large amount
of travel involved, at the very least.  Shouldn't be a cause for
concern, though; NTP should take the delays into account.


> I believe both the router and the bridge are set for dhcp.

That may or may not be a problem, depending on what your bridge's DHCP
server is doling out addresses to and to where (if it's the other side
of the network, and IPs aren't being duplicated, you should be okay).  

i.e. If one doles out different IPs than the other, on the same subnet
range (e.g. 192.168.1.1 to 192.168.1.100 by one of them, and
192.168.1.101 to 192.168.1.253 on the other).  Or, if the router's
passing out the 192.168.1.x addresses and the other one is doling out
the 10.0.0.x addresses.

The problem is when you have two DHCP servers on the same subnet, or
doling out the same IPs to interconnected subnets.

> For whatever reason I haven't been able to get to the bridge setup
> screen.  That's an annoyance and I don't know why but it works
> as it is, help from Linksys would require moving it back on to a
> Windows computer and then I would have a language problem.

Some devices also have a telnet address.  That gives you a simple
interface to the device, if you find the web interface doesn't get along
with your browser.  If worst comes to worst, there should be a master
reset button on it.

> Some of the addresses on the diagram were gleaned from the etherape
> display, e.g. the 192.168.1.255 for the router.

That may not be reading things correct, or if it is, you may strike some
problems (as I outlined above).

-- 
(Currently running FC4, in case that's important to the thread)

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.


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