Re: Network Horror
From: Bill Vermillion (bv_at_wjv.comREMOVE)
Date: 09/10/03
- Next message: Bill Vermillion: "Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down"
- Previous message: Bill Vermillion: "Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)"
- Maybe in reply to: Chaz: "Re: Network Horror"
- Next in thread: Chaz: "Re: Network Horror"
- Reply: Chaz: "Re: Network Horror"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 00:27:11 GMT
In article <f9a3c53f.0308290443.285bdab0@posting.google.com>,
Chaz <chaz@ten-25.co.uk> wrote:
>Weird one this.
>I have a network 126.x.x.x
Just because the 96.0.0.0 thru 126.255.255.255 is a reserverd
block doesn't mean you should use them.
Use the public blocks as the day the 126.x.x.x gets assinged you
will have to renumber everything you have.
>My server and all devices on the network are 126.x.x.x with subnet
>255.0.0.0
>I can see certain 126.x.x.x devices but some I can't
You give not details. And since the 126.0.0.0 is a reserved block
and isn't assinged [see Arin on that] you need to give more
details.
>The PC's can all see each other and the network prniters, but UNIX can
>only see a random selection.
Are you saying you can not reach these machine by pinging the IP.
What do your routing tables look like.
Where does default or 0.0.0.0 point to?
-- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
- Next message: Bill Vermillion: "Re: sco.com and caldera.com are down"
- Previous message: Bill Vermillion: "Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)"
- Maybe in reply to: Chaz: "Re: Network Horror"
- Next in thread: Chaz: "Re: Network Horror"
- Reply: Chaz: "Re: Network Horror"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
