Re: Help! Instable network on 6.06 based SuperMicro server with e1000 Intel driver

On 24 feb 2008, at 21:49, Aart Koelewijn wrote:

On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 21:22:23 +0100, Floris Vlasveld wrote:

On 24 feb 2008, at 16:52, Nick Webb wrote:

Floris Vlasveld wrote:

And, the output of "ethtool eth0" and eth1:

Settings for eth0:
Supported ports: [ TP ]
Supported link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
1000baseT/Full
Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
Advertised link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
1000baseT/Full
Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
Speed: 100Mb/s
Duplex: Full
Port: Twisted Pair
PHYAD: 0
Transceiver: internal
Auto-negotiation: on
Supports Wake-on: umbg
Wake-on: g
Current message level: 0x00000007 (7) Link detected: yes

Settings for eth1:
Supported ports: [ TP ]
Supported link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
1000baseT/Full
Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
Advertised link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
1000baseT/Full
Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
Speed: 100Mb/s
Duplex: Full
Port: Twisted Pair
PHYAD: 0
Transceiver: internal
Auto-negotiation: on
Supports Wake-on: umbg
Wake-on: g
Current message level: 0x00000007 (7) Link detected: yes

I have similar SuperMicro servers with no issues. I'd look first
at
the
switch this server is connect to and make sure the ports are set to
auto
negotiate just like your interfaces are. If they are set to auto
negotiation, then I'd force them to 100/full and do the same to
your
server's network cards. I've seen speed/duplex mismatches cause
lots
of
odd problems before.

Aside from that, I'd be looking for hardware issues. See anything
odd
in the logs?


Nick


Thanks for the tips Nick. I've first of all forced eth0 (the
'external'
interface) to operate at 100/Full. However, that didn't stop the
problem. I then changed the settings so that eth0 was allowed to
negotiate, but only up to 10/Full. Unfortunately, this didn't solve
the
problem as well. At this time, I'm not able to force the 3com
switch to
operate at 100/full only. However, it should be able to handle both
100/full and 10/full perfectly.

Output of ethtool eth0 at this time:

Settings for eth0:
Supported ports: [ TP ]
Supported link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
1000baseT/Full
Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
Advertised link modes: 10baseT/Full
Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
Speed: 10Mb/s
Duplex: Full
Port: Twisted Pair
PHYAD: 1
Transceiver: internal
Auto-negotiation: on
Supports Wake-on: umbg
Wake-on: g
Current message level: 0x00000007 (7) Link detected: yes

Hardware issue is of course always possible. However, since both
eth0
and eth1 display this problem, that seems quite unlikely.

Do you or anybody else have any other suggestion?

Floris.

With such a problem I would always check route. It has happened to me
that there are 2 default routes or none at all. In both cases you
will
have problems with your network.

Aart

Thanks for your reply Aart. How exactly would I check that? What do I
look for?

Output of "route" is as follows:

Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref
Use Iface
80.69.93.0 * 255.255.255.128 U 0 0
0 eth0
10.0.0.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0
0 eth1
default 10.0.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0
0 eth1
default 80.69.93.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0
0 eth0


Wow! You just solved my problem Aart. I indeed had two default routes,
as you can see. Removing the gateway on the second NIC solved it.
Thanks a lot!


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

Relevant Pages