On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Rudi Ahlers <Rudi at softdux.com> wrote:> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:49 AM, compdoc <compdoc at hotrodpc.com> wrote: >> I love realtek - the resources they use tend not to conflict with other >> cards or hardware, they don't use much cpu time, the drivers are mature, and >> they don't cost much. What could be better? There does seem to be at least >> one onboard realtek chipset that can have driver issues, but I use the 8169 >> without problems. >> >> But hardware does fail. And any brand of nic can fail in odd ways. I'm >> guessing you've swapped it out? > > Yes, the NIC might have failed, but how do I tell? lspci still shows > it as active. > > >> >> Bios settings can change if the on-board battery is dead and the system >> loses power. (It can set to defaults) But bios settings rarely affect nics - >> you're more likely to see boot problems from a change in drive boot >> sequence. > > I already checked, BIOS settings didn't change :) > >> >> I don't suppose you have a vpn on your lan? I noticed you use the >> 192.168.1.x address range, which is one of the most common ranges in the >> world. If someone connects to your vpn from home or workplace, and if they >> use the same range, ?and if theres a bridge, addresses are going to >> conflict. > > This is purely cause the ADSL router in the office is on the > 192.168.1.0 subnet, so it's less hassle when it needs to be swapped > out to get it back up again. No VPN. > > >> >> If you delete your ifcfg-eth0 or ifcfg-eth1 files, centos will recreate them >> if it sees the nics at boot. But it tends to enable eth0 and disable eth1 or >> higher. You should have backups of your originals for that reason... > > I've already tried that, but eth0 doesn't automatically get detected. > > >> >> I bet you wish you had a tcp/ip based kvm switch system about now... >> > > Yes, I supposed I could take one from a client server, or open a > sealed one, but it's not really necessary. For now I put in another > D-Link and got the server up that way, but would prefer to use the > onboard one since I had to take everything out of the 1U chassis, > which doesn't support more than 1 additional NIC. > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> > >This is really weird, after I installed the 2nd D-Link card and booted up the server everyone could work again. But I noticed and eth2 being loaded as well, which could only make sense if the onboard NIC was in fact still working. And it was. So I took out the D-Link, deleted eth2, rebooted and it worked again as normal. Why would this happen, or have happened in the first place? Why would a NIC just loose it's drivers like that? -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers SoftDux Website: http://www.SoftDux.com Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com Office: 087 805 9573 Cell: 082 554 7532
Lisandro Grullon
2011-Jan-10 13:40 UTC
[CentOS] how to recreate eth0 - Realtek 8169sc [SOLVED]
Rudi, Sounds like a module conflict/misconfiguration, but anyway glad its working back. have you upgrade this system with the latest kernel build. I am guessing both onboard NICs are the same brand, take a look at messages and see if the card give me problems in the future. make sure you look for packet drops or errors that may hinder a bad NIC in the near future. Put your admin hat on a design a good plan to tackle this issue so you don't sweet it in the near future. Two cents.>>> Rudi Ahlers <Rudi at SoftDux.com> 1/10/2011 6:18 AM >>>On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Rudi Ahlers <Rudi at softdux.com> wrote:> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:49 AM, compdoc <compdoc at hotrodpc.com> wrote: >> I love realtek - the resources they use tend not to conflict with other >> cards or hardware, they don't use much cpu time, the drivers are mature, and >> they don't cost much. What could be better? There does seem to be at least >> one onboard realtek chipset that can have driver issues, but I use the 8169 >> without problems. >> >> But hardware does fail. And any brand of nic can fail in odd ways. I'm >> guessing you've swapped it out? > > Yes, the NIC might have failed, but how do I tell? lspci still shows > it as active. > > >> >> Bios settings can change if the on-board battery is dead and the system >> loses power. (It can set to defaults) But bios settings rarely affect nics - >> you're more likely to see boot problems from a change in drive boot >> sequence. > > I already checked, BIOS settings didn't change :) > >> >> I don't suppose you have a vpn on your lan? I noticed you use the >> 192.168.1.x address range, which is one of the most common ranges in the >> world. If someone connects to your vpn from home or workplace, and if they >> use the same range, and if theres a bridge, addresses are going to >> conflict. > > This is purely cause the ADSL router in the office is on the > 192.168.1.0 subnet, so it's less hassle when it needs to be swapped > out to get it back up again. No VPN. > > >> >> If you delete your ifcfg-eth0 or ifcfg-eth1 files, centos will recreate them >> if it sees the nics at boot. But it tends to enable eth0 and disable eth1 or >> higher. You should have backups of your originals for that reason... > > I've already tried that, but eth0 doesn't automatically get detected. > > >> >> I bet you wish you had a tcp/ip based kvm switch system about now... >> > > Yes, I supposed I could take one from a client server, or open a > sealed one, but it's not really necessary. For now I put in another > D-Link and got the server up that way, but would prefer to use the > onboard one since I had to take everything out of the 1U chassis, > which doesn't support more than 1 additional NIC. > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> > >This is really weird, after I installed the 2nd D-Link card and booted up the server everyone could work again. But I noticed and eth2 being loaded as well, which could only make sense if the onboard NIC was in fact still working. And it was. So I took out the D-Link, deleted eth2, rebooted and it worked again as normal. Why would this happen, or have happened in the first place? Why would a NIC just loose it's drivers like that? -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers SoftDux Website: http://www.SoftDux.com Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com Office: 087 805 9573 Cell: 082 554 7532 _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS at centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20110110/a4f38f35/attachment-0002.html>
Tommy E Craddock Jr
2011-Jan-10 13:54 UTC
[CentOS] how to recreate eth0 - Realtek 8169sc [SOLVED]
Hey, If it happens again, or maybe it might show in /var/log/messages, if there was a MAC address conflict in the ifcfg files. I've seen where eth0 won't come on as the MAC address set in the cfg file wasnt matching. Some times it fails with a message on an ifdown ifup, sometimes it doesn't. Now that eth2 was created and the MAC is matching it works. The pieces line up but doesn't mean that it was happened. Just an idea. Tommy C. On Jan 10, 2011, at 6:18 AM, Rudi Ahlers <Rudi at SoftDux.com> wrote:> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Rudi Ahlers <Rudi at softdux.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:49 AM, compdoc <compdoc at hotrodpc.com> wrote: >>> I love realtek - the resources they use tend not to conflict with other >>> cards or hardware, they don't use much cpu time, the drivers are mature, and >>> they don't cost much. What could be better? There does seem to be at least >>> one onboard realtek chipset that can have driver issues, but I use the 8169 >>> without problems. >>> >>> But hardware does fail. And any brand of nic can fail in odd ways. I'm >>> guessing you've swapped it out? >> >> Yes, the NIC might have failed, but how do I tell? lspci still shows >> it as active. >> >> >>> >>> Bios settings can change if the on-board battery is dead and the system >>> loses power. (It can set to defaults) But bios settings rarely affect nics - >>> you're more likely to see boot problems from a change in drive boot >>> sequence. >> >> I already checked, BIOS settings didn't change :) >> >>> >>> I don't suppose you have a vpn on your lan? I noticed you use the >>> 192.168.1.x address range, which is one of the most common ranges in the >>> world. If someone connects to your vpn from home or workplace, and if they >>> use the same range, and if theres a bridge, addresses are going to >>> conflict. >> >> This is purely cause the ADSL router in the office is on the >> 192.168.1.0 subnet, so it's less hassle when it needs to be swapped >> out to get it back up again. No VPN. >> >> >>> >>> If you delete your ifcfg-eth0 or ifcfg-eth1 files, centos will recreate them >>> if it sees the nics at boot. But it tends to enable eth0 and disable eth1 or >>> higher. You should have backups of your originals for that reason... >> >> I've already tried that, but eth0 doesn't automatically get detected. >> >> >>> >>> I bet you wish you had a tcp/ip based kvm switch system about now... >>> >> >> Yes, I supposed I could take one from a client server, or open a >> sealed one, but it's not really necessary. For now I put in another >> D-Link and got the server up that way, but would prefer to use the >> onboard one since I had to take everything out of the 1U chassis, >> which doesn't support more than 1 additional NIC. >> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >> >> > > This is really weird, after I installed the 2nd D-Link card and booted > up the server everyone could work again. But I noticed and eth2 being > loaded as well, which could only make sense if the onboard NIC was in > fact still working. And it was. So I took out the D-Link, deleted > eth2, rebooted and it worked again as normal. > > Why would this happen, or have happened in the first place? Why would > a NIC just loose it's drivers like that? > > > -- > Kind Regards > Rudi Ahlers > SoftDux > > Website: http://www.SoftDux.com > Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com > Office: 087 805 9573 > Cell: 082 554 7532 > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20110110/ecf5f181/attachment-0002.html>