Hi, Now the L3forward and the count example is working on enp-2505. I use only 100Mbps switch/hub and 100Mbps ethernet card, i.e. no 10Mbps. And I find it is not enough. Schuetze, Joel D has sent a patch to me. After I apply the patch the examples work fine. Do you have the patch? It includes board.h, config_1.cpp, and Steps.doc, three files. The Steps.doc gives detailed instructions. If you want I can mail it to you. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Yu, Heeyeol" To: ; Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 9:59 PM Subject: RE: RE: [ixp1200] l3fwdr

Let me get out of this mailing list. Does anyone tell the method?

-----Original Message----- From: owner-ixp1200@cs.princeton.edu [mailto:owner-ixp1200@cs.princeton.edu] On Behalf Of vikram nayak Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 11:37 PM To: ixp1200@cs.princeton.edu Subject: Re: RE: [ixp1200] l3fwdr

I got the mac addresses form enp> test macadd show....it displayed all 4 macs addresses.. in the ixsys*.config file i added these macadd to the ports 0, 1, 2, 3... ( i havent modified the route* file, like some had suggested to at the GW, show I? ) ... did ./ixstart ixsys*.config.... ifconfig .. for the l3 sample displays all 4 interfaces for the count sample displays none of th interfaces ?

in both cases when i try pinging the port from another machine directly connected by a crossover, it says network unreachable... any ideas??

when i did a tcpdump on the external machine it hung and now refuses to reboot?

can i connect the port to a LAN through a straight cable and be able to notice activity??

thanx, vikram

----- Original Message ----- From: vikram nayak Date: Thursday, April 17, 2003 8:52 pm Subject: Re: RE: [ixp1200] l3fwdr

...

how do i prog the PHY device so that its 10MB mode is not default. How

...

knowif the device is 10 or 100?

----- Original Message ----- From: "Botham, Mick" Date: Sunday, April 6, 2003 3:42 am Subject: RE: [ixp1200] l3fwdr

...

Kamesh,

I'm not sure if this applies to the ENP-2305, but it did affect the IXP1200EB.

Some PHY devices default 10MB mode is also loop-back mode, so on a 10MB connection, as soon as a packet is sent by the IXP1200 it gets looped back to the IXP1200, and so the process goes on, the result is a packet flood. The fix was either to connect to a 100MB device so the PHY would auto-negotiate to 100MB, or to program the PHY so that in 10MB mode it wasn't set to loopback.

Rgds

Mick

Hi, Ping was not running. In fact the PC kind of hangs ie mouse pointer disappears etc when I connnect. I am able to see the output only after I disconnect. Configuration: Ethernet port 1 of ENP-2505 is connected back-to-back to the eth1 of the host PC ( PC in which the card is plugged in) through a crossover cable. The IP address of the IXP port is 192.168.1.150 and the IP address of the PC port is 192.168.1.3 .

Also is there any option is the ixsys.config file through which I can specify the rate ? Thanks, Kamesh.

Abhijeet Joglekar wrote:

...

Hi Kameswara,

I guess you have already tried to connect the PC port to the IXP port without going thro' the hub as Cyrus suggested. Just to rule out any autonegotiation problems betweem 10/100 hub and IXP port.

So is ping running when you captured that tcpdump output? Also, what are the interface addresses of the IXP port and the PC port in your setup?

-- abhijeet

On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Kameswara Avasarala wrote:

...

Hi, This is what I observe if I do a tcpdump.

Cyrus Hall wrote:

...

Hi there-

You mention a great deal of link level activity. Have you done a TCP dump? I had my ENP-2505 hooked up to a 10 Mbps hub which was causing all sorts of issues, including a packet flood to be issued from

do i the card

...

...

...

...

...

whenever I tried to start up a uACE. Make sure all interfaces are 100 Mbps and see if that helps...

Hi, Does anyone know why in the ICMP::CopyICMPMessage call in ICMP::BuildICMPMessage, the last parameter is the length of the IP header, not the length of the IP packet? It was always my understanding the ICMP packet should fit as much of the IP packet causing the exception, not just the header. Also when the checksum is calculated for IP, the parameters would cover the header only, not the whole packet. Any ideas? Thanks, Bassem