Our company just connected my office’s LAN to our other offices’ LANs with
magical hardware. It looks something like this:
X.Y.4.0 Lan for office 1
X.Y.5.0 Lan for my office
X.Y.6.0 Lan for office 3
X.Y.7.0 Lan for office 4
We were told to use a netmask of 255.255.252.0 (or oxFFFFFC00). This
actually represents a supernet for our 4 consecutive class C addresses. We
are running Socket 4.25H. When I issue the command:
ifconfig en1 netmask 0xFFFFFC00
and then redisplay it with
ifconfig en1
it is always changed back to 0xFFFFFF00
Consequently, I can not access any of the .4 .6 or .7 nets.
I can subnet but not supernet. Is this possible with QNX4?
Unfortunately the Winblows box right next to me works fine like this. (Boo,
hiss)
=====================
I thought of the alternative of adding net routs. Since I am on the .5 net
I added:
route add X.Y.4.0 X.Y.5.0
route add X.Y.6.0 X.Y.5.0
route add X.Y.7.0 X.Y.5.0
This gives the illusion of working when I do a
netstat -rn
But when I try a ping as in:
ping X.Y.4.1
I get no responce at all. Notice that I an NOT getting “No Route to Host”
errors so I assume that my packets are getting out. I’m just not getting
the responce back.
Again, the Winblows box right next to me works fine like this. (Double Boo,
hiss)
Can I get either of these scenerios to work for me?
=====================
I was told by our MIS guy that they can’t get a Winblows box to gateway for
me because the Winblows box believes that these four networks ARE the same
network (and unfortunately, its right) and it won’t forward packets from a
network to the same network.
Bill at Sierra Design <BC@sierradesign.com> wrote:
Our company just connected my office’s LAN to our other offices’ LANs with
magical hardware. It looks something like this:
X.Y.4.0 Lan for office 1
X.Y.5.0 Lan for my office
X.Y.6.0 Lan for office 3
X.Y.7.0 Lan for office 4
We were told to use a netmask of 255.255.252.0 (or oxFFFFFC00). This
actually represents a supernet for our 4 consecutive class C addresses. We
are running Socket 4.25H. When I issue the command:
ifconfig en1 netmask 0xFFFFFC00
and then redisplay it with
ifconfig en1
it is always changed back to 0xFFFFFF00
I don’t think the released Socket supports supernetting. There was a
beta of TCP/IP 5.0 which, I think, does support supernetting. You might
try joining that beta – I think you need to send email to beta@qnx.com,
but I’m not completely up to speed on those procedures anymore – there
should probably be information on the QDN about joining beta programs.
-David
On 15 Dec 2000, David Gibbs wrote:
Bill at Sierra Design <> BC@sierradesign.com> > wrote:
Our company just connected my office’s LAN to our other offices’ LANs with
magical hardware. It looks something like this:
X.Y.4.0 Lan for office 1
X.Y.5.0 Lan for my office
X.Y.6.0 Lan for office 3
X.Y.7.0 Lan for office 4
We were told to use a netmask of 255.255.252.0 (or oxFFFFFC00). This
actually represents a supernet for our 4 consecutive class C addresses. We
are running Socket 4.25H. When I issue the command:
ifconfig en1 netmask 0xFFFFFC00
and then redisplay it with
ifconfig en1
it is always changed back to 0xFFFFFF00
I don’t think the released Socket supports supernetting. There was a
beta of TCP/IP 5.0 which, I think, does support supernetting. You might
speaking of tcpip 5.0 beta. it’s been several years. everytime I asked,
I was told it would be released real soon.
one time, I even asked if this product is dropped but was told no.
so again, when will it be released?
try joining that beta – I think you need to send email to > beta@qnx.com> ,
but I’m not completely up to speed on those procedures anymore – there
should probably be information on the QDN about joining beta programs.
-David
Hi Dave,
I’m working on this. I used to be part of the TCP 5.0 beta. But I see that
there is no longer a QUICS conference for it. Where is the proper place to
post questions.
Also, why didn’t the “route add net” commands work?
David Gibbs <dagibbs@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:91dqvt$rfv$2@nntp.qnx.com…
I don’t think the released Socket supports supernetting. There was a
beta of TCP/IP 5.0 which, I think, does support supernetting. You might
try joining that beta – I think you need to send email to > beta@qnx.com> ,
but I’m not completely up to speed on those procedures anymore – there
should probably be information on the QDN about joining beta programs.
-David
Bill at Sierra Design <BC@sierradesign.com> wrote:
Hi Dave,
I’m working on this. I used to be part of the TCP 5.0 beta. But I see that
there is no longer a QUICS conference for it. Where is the proper place to
post questions.
Also, why didn’t the “route add net” commands work?
I’m not an expert in internet protocol, but my understand is as
follows:
This happens because you weren’t sending the packets to the address of
the machines you wanted to receive the packets.
IP addressing works by saying send packet to node blah on network blah –
with which part is node and which part is network controlled by the netmask.
So, if you have a machine that is ip 10.5.3.5, and your netmask is
255.255.255.0, then the machine thinks it is node 5 on network 10.5.3.
But, if you send a packet out to ip 10.5.3.5 with netmask 255.255.0.0,
then you are sending a packet to node 3.5 on network 10.5.
Node 5 on network 10.5.3 is NOT the same as node 3.5 on network 10.5.
-David
QNX Training Services
dagibbs@qnx.com
Damb! This makes sense.
David Gibbs <dagibbs@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:91eb0f$69f$1@nntp.qnx.com…
Bill at Sierra Design <> BC@sierradesign.com> > wrote:
Hi Dave,
I’m working on this. I used to be part of the TCP 5.0 beta. But I see
that
there is no longer a QUICS conference for it. Where is the proper place
to
post questions.
Also, why didn’t the “route add net” commands work?
I’m not an expert in internet protocol, but my understand is as
follows:
This happens because you weren’t sending the packets to the address of
the machines you wanted to receive the packets.
IP addressing works by saying send packet to node blah on network blah –
with which part is node and which part is network controlled by the
netmask.
So, if you have a machine that is ip 10.5.3.5, and your netmask is
255.255.255.0, then the machine thinks it is node 5 on network 10.5.3.
But, if you send a packet out to ip 10.5.3.5 with netmask 255.255.0.0,
then you are sending a packet to node 3.5 on network 10.5.
Node 5 on network 10.5.3 is NOT the same as node 3.5 on network 10.5.
-David
QNX Training Services
dagibbs@qnx.com
If your router is advanced enough, you will be able to get around that.
On 15 Dec 2000, David Gibbs wrote:
Bill at Sierra Design <> BC@sierradesign.com> > wrote:
Hi Dave,
I’m working on this. I used to be part of the TCP 5.0 beta. But I see that
there is no longer a QUICS conference for it. Where is the proper place to
post questions.
Also, why didn’t the “route add net” commands work?
I’m not an expert in internet protocol, but my understand is as
follows:
This happens because you weren’t sending the packets to the address of
the machines you wanted to receive the packets.
IP addressing works by saying send packet to node blah on network blah –
with which part is node and which part is network controlled by the netmask.
So, if you have a machine that is ip 10.5.3.5, and your netmask is
255.255.255.0, then the machine thinks it is node 5 on network 10.5.3.
But, if you send a packet out to ip 10.5.3.5 with netmask 255.255.0.0,
then you are sending a packet to node 3.5 on network 10.5.
Node 5 on network 10.5.3 is NOT the same as node 3.5 on network 10.5.
-David
QNX Training Services
dagibbs@qnx.com
I tried re-installing the beta 5.0 archives.
I did a fresh get from ftp.qnx.com of /updates/beta.tcpip/Full_archives.
When I tried to install the archive, it started the upgrade and stopped
somewhere in the middle with an error message that I needed to install
"qcrypt’ something or other. I have not been able to find that on /updates.
And just to add to the excitement, I am not able to UNDO the beta 5.0
install. So I currently have no TCP/IP on this node.
Where do I get this qcrypt archive to install?
Is there supposed to be a procedure for uninstalling the beta 5.0 TCP/IP?
David Gibbs <dagibbs@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:91dqvt$rfv$2@nntp.qnx.com…
I don’t think the released Socket supports supernetting. There was a
beta of TCP/IP 5.0 which, I think, does support supernetting. You might
try joining that beta – I think you need to send email to > beta@qnx.com> ,
but I’m not completely up to speed on those procedures anymore – there
should probably be information on the QDN about joining beta programs.
-David
“Bill at Sierra Design” <BC@SierraDesign.com> wrote in message
news:91ef16$ed2$1@inn.qnx.com…
I tried re-installing the beta 5.0 archives.
I did a fresh get from ftp.qnx.com of /updates/beta.tcpip/Full_archives.
When I tried to install the archive, it started the upgrade and stopped
somewhere in the middle with an error message that I needed to install
"qcrypt’ something or other. I have not been able to find that on
/updates.
And just to add to the excitement, I am not able to UNDO the beta 5.0
install. So I currently have no TCP/IP on this node.
Where do I get this qcrypt archive to install?
Is there supposed to be a procedure for uninstalling the beta 5.0 TCP/IP?
The crypt stuff is in qnx425 area I beleive.
David Gibbs <> dagibbs@qnx.com> > wrote in message
news:91dqvt$rfv$> 2@nntp.qnx.com> …
I don’t think the released Socket supports supernetting. There was a
beta of TCP/IP 5.0 which, I think, does support supernetting. You might
try joining that beta – I think you need to send email to > beta@qnx.com> ,
but I’m not completely up to speed on those procedures anymore – there
should probably be information on the QDN about joining beta programs.
-David
Thanks all.
TCP/IP 5.0 beta is now installed and working along with supernetting.
So this leads to two new questions.
- Since 5.0 is still beta. Are there any gotchyas I should be aware of?
- Since there have been no updates since May 15th, when will it be
released?
Mario Charest <mcharest@void_zinformatic.com> wrote in message
news:91egr4$9ii$1@nntp.qnx.com…
“Bill at Sierra Design” <> BC@SierraDesign.com> > wrote in message
news:91ef16$ed2$> 1@inn.qnx.com> …
I tried re-installing the beta 5.0 archives.
I did a fresh get from ftp.qnx.com of /updates/beta.tcpip/Full_archives.
When I tried to install the archive, it started the upgrade and stopped
somewhere in the middle with an error message that I needed to install
"qcrypt’ something or other. I have not been able to find that on
/updates.
And just to add to the excitement, I am not able to UNDO the beta 5.0
install. So I currently have no TCP/IP on this node.
Where do I get this qcrypt archive to install?
Is there supposed to be a procedure for uninstalling the beta 5.0
TCP/IP?
The crypt stuff is in qnx425 area I beleive.
David Gibbs <> dagibbs@qnx.com> > wrote in message
news:91dqvt$rfv$> 2@nntp.qnx.com> …
I don’t think the released Socket supports supernetting. There was a
beta of TCP/IP 5.0 which, I think, does support supernetting. You
might
try joining that beta – I think you need to send email to
beta@qnx.com> ,
but I’m not completely up to speed on those procedures anymore –
there
should probably be information on the QDN about joining beta programs.
-David
\
Hi Dave,
As mentioned in another post I now have 5.0 working. Thank you.
You last statement here was a real eye opener for me. I hadn’t quite
realized that, but . . .
David Gibbs <dagibbs@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:91eb0f$69f$1@nntp.qnx.com…
IP addressing works by saying send packet to node blah on network blah –
with which part is node and which part is network controlled by the
netmask.
So, if you have a machine that is ip 10.5.3.5, and your netmask is
255.255.255.0, then the machine thinks it is node 5 on network 10.5.3.
But, if you send a packet out to ip 10.5.3.5 with netmask 255.255.0.0,
then you are sending a packet to node 3.5 on network 10.5.
Node 5 on network 10.5.3 is NOT the same as node 3.5 on network 10.5.
-David
QNX Training Services
dagibbs@qnx.com
Since I didn’t get an answer to the TCP/IP V5.0 beta question, I’ll ask my
next question here.
We have an in-house DNS at (X.Y.5.1). My /etc/resolv.conf file has one line
that isn’t commented out. It reads:
nameserver X.Y.5.1
If I try to do a name look as in:
/> nslookup qnx.com
or
/> nslookup qnx.com.
I get:
*** Can’t find server name for address X.Y.5.1: Non-existant
host/domain
*** Default servers are not available
I have NOT defines a domain name. I have left the line in resole.conf
commented out.
Do I need a domain name?
What must I do to access the DNS?
David Gibbs <dagibbs@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:91eb0f$69f$1@nntp.qnx.com…
Bill at Sierra Design <> BC@sierradesign.com> > wrote:
Hi Dave,
I’m working on this. I used to be part of the TCP 5.0 beta. But I see
that
there is no longer a QUICS conference for it. Where is the proper place
to
post questions.
Ping?
Bill at Sierra Design <BC@SierraDesign.com> wrote in message
news:91g9be$ghc$1@inn.qnx.com…
Thanks all.
TCP/IP 5.0 beta is now installed and working along with supernetting.
So this leads to two new questions.
- Since 5.0 is still beta. Are there any gotchyas I should be aware of?
- Since there have been no updates since May 15th, when will it be
released?
David Gibbs <> dagibbs@qnx.com> > wrote in message
news:91dqvt$rfv$> 2@nntp.qnx.com> …
I don’t think the released Socket supports supernetting. There was
a
beta of TCP/IP 5.0 which, I think, does support supernetting. You
might
try joining that beta – I think you need to send email to
beta@qnx.com> ,
but I’m not completely up to speed on those procedures anymore –
there
should probably be information on the QDN about joining beta
programs.
-David
Ouch!
The TCP/IP 5.0 beta does not have an NFS client!?!?!
When will this be available?
And once again, what is the status of the 5.0 beta?
David Gibbs <dagibbs@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:91dqvt$rfv$2@nntp.qnx.com…
I don’t think the released Socket supports supernetting. There was a
beta of TCP/IP 5.0 which, I think, does support supernetting. You might
try joining that beta – I think you need to send email to > beta@qnx.com> ,
but I’m not completely up to speed on those procedures anymore – there
should probably be information on the QDN about joining beta programs.
-David
Bill at Sierra Design <BC@sierradesign.com> wrote:
Ouch!
The TCP/IP 5.0 beta does not have an NFS client!?!?!
See the “What is NFS?” chapter for instructions…
When will this be available?
And once again, what is the status of the 5.0 beta?
The latest Beta was posted December 22, 2001.
As well, online TCP/IP docs made their debut at:
http://qdn.qnx.com/support/docs/index.html
The docs have been reviewed for the last time, and I’m updating
those changes now. If that’s any indication, the release should be
ready RSN.
-Donna
David Gibbs <> dagibbs@qnx.com> > wrote in message
news:91dqvt$rfv$> 2@nntp.qnx.com> …
I don’t think the released Socket supports supernetting. There was a
beta of TCP/IP 5.0 which, I think, does support supernetting. You might
try joining that beta – I think you need to send email to > beta@qnx.com> ,
but I’m not completely up to speed on those procedures anymore – there
should probably be information on the QDN about joining beta programs.
-David
Donna Kinsman <dkinsman@qnx.com> wrote:
Bill at Sierra Design <> BC@sierradesign.com> > wrote:
Ouch!
The TCP/IP 5.0 beta does not have an NFS client!?!?!
See the “What is NFS?” chapter for instructions…
When will this be available?
And once again, what is the status of the 5.0 beta?
The latest Beta was posted December 22, 2001.
sigh… make that 2000!
As well, online TCP/IP docs made their debut at:
http://qdn.qnx.com/support/docs/index.html
The docs have been reviewed for the last time, and I’m updating
those changes now. If that’s any indication, the release should be
ready RSN.
-Donna
David Gibbs <> dagibbs@qnx.com> > wrote in message
news:91dqvt$rfv$> 2@nntp.qnx.com> …
I don’t think the released Socket supports supernetting. There was a
beta of TCP/IP 5.0 which, I think, does support supernetting. You might
try joining that beta – I think you need to send email to > beta@qnx.com> ,
but I’m not completely up to speed on those procedures anymore – there
should probably be information on the QDN about joining beta programs.
-David
Thanks.
As I told Ben in private e-mail, I didn’t have the Dec, 22 update.
Donna Kinsman <dkinsman@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:93cvlp$t0o$1@nntp.qnx.com…
Bill at Sierra Design <> BC@sierradesign.com> > wrote:
Ouch!
The TCP/IP 5.0 beta does not have an NFS client!?!?!
See the “What is NFS?” chapter for instructions…
When will this be available?
And once again, what is the status of the 5.0 beta?
The latest Beta was posted December 22, 2001.
As well, online TCP/IP docs made their debut at:
http://qdn.qnx.com/support/docs/index.html
The docs have been reviewed for the last time, and I’m updating
those changes now. If that’s any indication, the release should be
ready RSN.
-Donna
David Gibbs <> dagibbs@qnx.com> > wrote in message
news:91dqvt$rfv$> 2@nntp.qnx.com> …
I don’t think the released Socket supports supernetting. There was a
beta of TCP/IP 5.0 which, I think, does support supernetting. You
might
try joining that beta – I think you need to send email to
beta@qnx.com> ,
but I’m not completely up to speed on those procedures anymore – there
should probably be information on the QDN about joining beta programs.
-David