Here it is on Rawhide. I did not enter 70... as netmask!
The generated scripts on fc9 are similar except the netmask values are the ones I entered, not something pulled out of the ozone layer.
When I get a chance I will edit the files manually and see what happens.
2008-11-24 00:15 ifcfg-eth0 Page 1
# 3Com Corporation 3c905C-TX/TX-M [Tornado] DEVICE=eth0 BOOTPROTO=none BROADCAST=70.89.176.169 DNS1=70.89.176.170 GATEWAY=70.89.176.170 HWADDR=00:04:75:8d:6a:78 IPADDR=70.89.176.169 NETMASK=70.89.176.170 ## entered as 255.255.255.252 ONBOOT=yes SEARCH="com" TYPE=Ethernet USERCTL=no IPV6INIT=no NM_CONTROLLED=no PEERDNS=yes 2008-11-24 00:15 ifcfg-eth1 Page 1
# Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8111/8168B PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet controller DEVICE=eth1 HWADDR=00:19:21:32:27:dc ONBOOT=yes SEARCH="com" BOOTPROTO=none IPADDR=192.168.1.13 USERCTL=no PEERDNS=yes IPV6INIT=no NM_CONTROLLED=no TYPE=Ethernet NETMASK=70.89.176.170 ## entered as 255.255.255.0 GATEWAY=70.89.176.170 ## not entered for this device [caf@omen tmp]$
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:22:53AM -0800, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
Here it is on Rawhide. I did not enter 70... as netmask!
....
BROADCAST=70.89.176.169
.....
IPADDR=70.89.176.169 NETMASK=70.89.176.170 ## entered as 255.255.255.252
With 255.255.255.252 (/30) for a netmask a broadcast address above does not make any sense too. It should read 70.89.176.171.
Do you really have only two hosts interfaces on this network as your /30 netmask choice would indicate?
Michal
Hello Michal,
Monday, November 24, 2008, 1:51:34 PM, you wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:22:53AM -0800, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
Here it is on Rawhide. I did not enter 70... as netmask!
....
BROADCAST=70.89.176.169
.....
IPADDR=70.89.176.169 NETMASK=70.89.176.170 ## entered as 255.255.255.252
With 255.255.255.252 (/30) for a netmask a broadcast address above does not make any sense too. It should read 70.89.176.171.
Do you really have only two hosts interfaces on this network as your /30 netmask choice would indicate?
Michal
My experiences are identical - static networking is extremely unwell for the FC10 release right now.
Something (system-config-network ?) is setting the NETMASK value to the value entered for NETWORK. system-config-network also terminates with an exception when I try to enable MTU and set to 1492 (I'm on DSL).
One must manually change the /etc/sysconfig/networking/devices files to restore normal operation.
I have installed FC10 on 2 machines this weekend, one X64 (upgrade from FC8) and one i386 (fresh install on new 1 TB drive) with the same results. I am setting them up with static networking as both are intended to host both BIND and DHCP servers. The X64 machine was fine running the default NetworkManager configuration while the i386 provided those services under FC8, but immediately failed this way when set to static addressing to act as interim server.
After much frustration, the X64 machine was operational enough to commence the i386 install - which immediately failed the same way when networking services were changed to swap NetworkManager out for Network and to set eth0 to static IP values.
It is very frustrating for such a basic/critical service fails so badly! Al
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 16:02:07 -0500 Al Dunsmuir al.dunsmuir@sympatico.ca wrote:
My experiences are identical - static networking is extremely unwell for the FC10 release right now.
When I was installing using the hard disk install technique, I noticed a "asknetwork" anaconda option. I used it during the install and actually got a good ifcfg-eth0 setup by it, so at least anaconda can get it right (if you know how to ask it).
Hello Tom,
Sunday, November 30, 2008, 4:40:55 PM, you wrote:
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 16:02:07 -0500 Al Dunsmuir al.dunsmuir@sympatico.ca wrote:
My experiences are identical - static networking is extremely unwell for the FC10 release right now.
When I was installing using the hard disk install technique, I noticed a "asknetwork" anaconda option. I used it during the install and actually got a good ifcfg-eth0 setup by it, so at least anaconda can get it right (if you know how to ask it).
Past GUI Fedora release installs allowed one to set up appropriate static networking out of the box. This one just asked for my host name - I did not see any prompt during FC10 install to allow me to specify what I really wanted. The i386 box is a Dell GX270 - I'd tried a FC10 preview level but it dropped me into the text install where there were many additional prompts for server-type. Unfortunately, it didn't install X, so I had to download the i386 FC10 final and do it over again.
One should not have to know secret Anaconda handshakes. The GUI and text installers have been largely equivalent in the past, but this seems to be no longer the case. Like "Allow logon as root", static networking should be a clear user choice with either install method. Oh. Right.
Since seeing another post about an hour ago about the blazing speed of ext4 fsck operations on large drives, I've installed yet again on the i386 box, splitting my main partition into 2 separate ones - a 200 GB for root, and the remainder for an ext4 samba share. My X64 box has 2 x 1 TB drives. I had the unpleasant experience of sitting through a gratuitous system-wide fsck on what happened to be my 25th reboot. That system was initially set up with FC9, then upgraded to FC10 a day after GA... but this networking mess has resulted in many extra reboots. Once the i386 box is completely set up and proves stable with ext4, the 2 large non-root partitions on the X64 box will that box will go ext4 too.
I think the current Anaconda in both modes has lost much necessary function, and no longer has appropriate support for non-trivial systems. There needs to be a serious rethink for FC11 (and hopefully FC10 service/respins) unless Fedora actually _intends_ to alienate everyone running more complex (server and otherwise) setups on their home LAN.
Al
Hello Michal,
Sunday, November 30, 2008, 9:12:32 PM, you wrote:
On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 04:02:07PM -0500, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Hello Michal,
I am here just an innocent bystander.
It is very frustrating for such a basic/critical service fails so badly!
And bugzilla numbers are ... ?
Bloody well going to have to wait until I have these silly beasts set up so I can actually put in a productive work-from-home day tomorrow (starting at 05:00).
M.
-
Al Dunsmuir -
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX -
Michal Jaegermann -
Tom Horsley