but it seems like I put it there. Should I remove it, do a save all
and reboot?
Ed
RCIA <<Relatively Cheap Internet Access>>
Redmond, WA
>Yes.
>
>I am at a lose to understand where in the Lucent Manual it says you should
>enter a static route for the local ether0 subnet. I see lots of people
doing
>this, and they should not.
>YOU SHOULD NEVER ENTER A STATIC ROUTE FOR THE LOCAL ETHER0 SUBNET.
>YOU SHOULD ONLY ENTER A STATIC ROUTE FOR NEXT HOB ROUTES TO A REMOTE
SUBNET.
>Sorry for the shouting, but this really annoys me.
>Once you enter it, it is a pain to get rid off.
>
>Idiots guide to changing the ether0 IP address on any Lucent Portmaster
>product:-
>Example:-
>If your ether0 address is currently 10.10.10.1 with netmask 255.255.255.0
>and you wish to change it to 192.168.180.1 with netmask 255.255.255.0
>Plug into console port. (You don't have to, but it is easier sometimes)
>>set ether0 addr 192.168.180.1
>>set ether0 netmask 255.255.255.0 (you have to enter this, even if it does
>not change,this is the line which adjusts the routing table)
>>save all (Good Idea but no need for a reboot)
>
>The routing table will be changed to match the new IP address.
>The entry for the local subnet should always have flag "NL".
>
>NEVER do the following:-
>add route 192.168.180.0/24 192.168.180.1 1
>
>Now, the easiest way to get rid of the "NEVER DO" static route is as
>follows.
>>save all
>>erase file routes
>>reboot
>
>I hope this helps some people.
>Cheers
>James
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-portmaster-users@livingston.com
>> [mailto:owner-portmaster-users@livingston.com]On Behalf Of Bob Shivers
>> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 1999 06:17
>> To: portmaster-users@livingston.com
>> Subject: (PM) Am I loosing my mind(more detail)
>>
>>
>> Has any one ever seen this before? (Sorry for the length of this)
>> we have several remote livingston routers on our network last week we
>> renumberd our entire network, here's what happened!
>>
>> we have an office router running ComOs 3.7.2L then I renumber the ether
>> interface and add route network address 209.40.64.128/25 router ether
>> address
>> 209.40.64.254 and met 1 (209.40.64.128/25 209.40.64.254 1) you can't
reach
>> any host on the
>> new network but if you add route (209.40.64.128/25 209.40.64.132 1)
>> 209.40.64.132 is a term
>> server and delete route (209.40.64.128/25 209.40.64.254 1) the
>> network comes
>> up if you
>> change back to the old network it works as it should (old network
>> 208.151.231.0).and the same thing
>> happens on an IRX114 running ComOs 3.7.2 on a differnt network.
>> DETAILS:Livingston all ready up loaded new comos
>> rt1-kf> sh rout
>> Destination Mask Gateway Source Flag Met Interface
>> ----------------- ---- -------------------- ------- ---- --- ---------
>> 0.0.0.0 0 208.151.229.1 local NS 1 frmW1
>> 208.151.229.81 32 208.151.229.1 rip HD 3 frmW1
>> 208.151.229.97 32 208.151.229.1 rip HD 3 frmW1
>> 208.151.229.64 28 208.151.229.1 rip ND 2 frmW1
>> 208.151.229.0 28 208.151.229.2 local NL 1 frmW1
>> 209.40.64.128 25 209.40.64.132 local NS 1
>> ether0 (this
>> is a local term server adding this rout was the only way we could bring
up
>> network ?)
>> 209.40.72.0 24 209.40.64.130 local NS 1 ether0
(TNT
>> DSLANT for DSL)
>> 209.40.74.0 24 208.151.229.1 rip ND 2 frmW1
>> 209.40.69.0 24 208.151.229.1 rip ND 2 frmW1
>> 208.234.221.0 24 208.151.229.1 rip ND 2 frmW1
>> 209.40.66.0 24 208.151.229.1 rip ND 2 frmW1
>> 206.100.190.0 24 208.151.229.1 rip ND 2 frmW1
>> 208.205.192.0 24 208.151.229.1 rip ND 2 frmW1
>> 207.48.101.0 24 208.151.229.1 rip ND 2 frmW1
>> 198.68.27.0 24 208.151.229.1 rip ND 2 frmW1
>> 172.31.0.0 16 208.151.229.1 rip ND 9 frmW1
>>
>> rt1-kf> sh ether0
>> Ethernet Status: IP - Enabled IPX - Disabled
>>
>> Interface Addr: 209.40.64.254
>> Netmask: 255.255.255.128
>> Broadcast Address: 209.40.64.255
>>
>> IPX Network: 00000000
>> IPX Frame Type: ETHERNET_802.2
>> Ethernet Address: 00:**:05:**:24:**
>>
>> Routing: OSPF, RIP(Broadcast, Listen (On))
>> Input Filter:
>> Output Filter:
>>
>> rt1-kf> sh w1
>> ----------------------- Current Status - Port W1
>> ---------------------------
>> Status: ESTABLISHED
>> Input: 1157604386 Abort Errors: 48/16
>> Output: 350043855 CRC Errors: 100
>> Pending: 0 Overrun Errors: 0
>> TX Errors: 0 Frame Errors: 102
>> Modem Status: DCD+ CTS+
>>
>> Active Configuration Default Configuration
>> -------------------- ---------------------
>> Port Type: Netwrk Netwrk (Hardwired)
>> Line Speed: Ext 1536K Ext Clock
>> Modem Control: on on
>> Local Address: 208.151.229.2 208.151.229.2
>> Netmask: 255.255.255.240 255.255.255.240
>> Interface: frmW1 (FRM,Routing) (FRM,Routing)
>> Mtu: 1500 0
>> Dial Group: 0
>> LMI Poll Int: 10 (seconds)
>> Old DLCI List: 17:208.151.229.1
>>
>> rt1-kf> sh arp ether0
>> 209.40.64.129 at 00:**:05:**:95:**
>> 209.40.64.130 at 00:**:7b:**:63:**
>> 209.40.64.243 at 00:**:18:**:65:**
>> 209.40.64.244 at 00:**:05:**:c2:**
>> 209.40.64.132 at 00:**:05:**:3d:**
>>
>> rt1-kf> ver
>> Livingston PortMaster Office Router ComOS 3.7.2L
>> System uptime is 2 days 18 hours 41 minutes
>>
>> I know its been a long week but this dosent add up to me.
>>
>> thanks
>> Bob Shivers
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
>> 'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
>> Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>
>>
>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
>'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
>Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>
>
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>