Multiple Network Card Question

I've got a Pc which has both a ethernet card and a wireless dongle used at different times.
In the setup for the 2Wire.com router I get the PC name listed twice ,once for each network card, understanable in a way I suppose as they have different identities on the LAN. But, when I'm making settings for the PC in the setup, I don't know which one I'm making the setting for - the PC name is just listed. How should I be doing this?

Don't worry, I've re-posted this in the business forum, as I think that#s where it should be.

Similar Messages

Configure multiple network card with netcfg

Hello Archers! I am a happy new user of Arch Linux . I wanna say that your community is really great, thanks to all the people giving help out there.
My question is:
I must configure two eth interfaces, I have the both configured but sometimes I need to change configuration for connecting to other network that needs only one network card with other IP. I would like to select the configuration trough the "NET_PROFILES=menu" line in /etc/rc.conf or with the "netcfg" command but I don't know how to configure TWO interfaces in ONE profile of the /etc/network-profiles/* files?
Both networks have Static IP.
I search on the forums and do not find anything useful. I'm sorry if is there something in other post that I doesn't read.
Last edited by gooze (2007-02-01 07:00:26)

TuxLyn,
this netcfg profile works OK for me for a long time now:
CONNECTION="ethernet"
DESCRIPTION="Bridge: nVidia Corporation MCP55 Ethernet (rev a2)"
INTERFACE=eth1
#HOSTNAME="archabit64"
IP="dhcp"
DHCP_TIMEOUT=15
DHCP_OPTIONS="-C resolv.conf"
DHCLIENT=no
POST_UP="ip addr add 192.168.2.115/24 broadcast 192.168.2.255 dev eth1"
Of course, yours is more circunvoluted, but perhaps it helps.
ip addr outputs:
eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000
link/ether 00:50:8d:9a:bc:2f brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 192.168.2.140/24 brd 192.168.2.255 scope global eth1
inet 192.168.2.115/24 brd 192.168.2.255 scope global secondary eth1
inet6 fe80::250:8dff:fe9a:bc2f/64 scope link
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
Mektub

Duel network card questions

Ok I see loads of new motherboards with this config. Dule network cards or Shotgun Network config. What are the Pros of this? I cant find any info on this. If this is good for network traffic then I will pop my other Network card into my K8N neo Plat. SO anyone have any info on this?

Alex,
I have a son in Brazil in Sao Paulo and one headed further north. Both are Mac Gurus from age ten.
Here is the Apple link that identifies the location of an airport card if you have one:
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1305?viewlocale=en_US
If you go to the Apple menu and select "About this Mac," then select "more info" you will find information about your hardware. Look under Network/airport card. That will also tell you what is installed without opening the cover to your mac.
Jim~
PS, if you do not have a card, make sure you buy the right one. Early models take one type in one location. Here is a video of the location of the later model.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TW5gxd3DD0

Multiple network card interface question

ok so i work for my college as a student worker in network operations. today they did a makeover on the dorm network and added in some traffic shaping. Instead of getting 8mb down im getting 1mb down. Well one of the admins went to lunch and had the new config still open on his computer so i shifted over and decided to take a look at this new ruleset. Im not sure why he did it like this but the traffic shaping is not done by a per port basis but by a per ip basis. Well i started thinking at this point and pulled out my old computer and installed arch on it to use as a download box for all my bittorrent needs, i have this box loaded up with 6 nics (5 pci and 1 onboard) each pulling their own ip, how can i get arch to bridge all 6 nics (or multiplex) so i can get atleast most of my bandwidth back.
Yes i asked them to exclude me from the trafficshaping but was told it wouldnt be fair to the other students
Last edited by crashbox (2008-10-02 06:02:56)

Don't worry, I've re-posted this in the business forum, as I think that#s where it should be.

Multiple network interface question

ok so i work for my college as a student worker in network operations. today they did a makeover on the dorm network and added in some traffic shaping. Instead of getting 8mb down im getting 1mb down. Well one of the admins went to lunch and had the new config still open on his computer so i shifted over and decided to take a look at this new ruleset. Im not sure why he did it like this but the traffic shaping is not done by a per port basis but by a per ip basis. Well i started thinking at this point and pulled out my old computer and installed arch on it to use as a download box for all my bittorrent needs, i have this box loaded up with 6 nics (5 pci and 1 onboard) each pulling their own ip, how can i get arch to bridge all 6 nics (or multiplex) so i can get atleast most of my bandwidth back.
Yes i asked them to exclude me from the trafficshaping but was told it wouldnt be fair to the other students

This might help: http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html

2 network cards in Windows 8.1 but can't set the correct one to Private

Hi, I already asked this question in the community forum but was re-directed here as you guys know more about multiple network cards in Windows 8.
I'm using Windows 8.1 with 2 network cards. One for my internal LAN (will call this my secure LAN which has a static IP) and one for connection to the internet (Internet LAN which is DHCP). Both networks are totally physically seperate. This is for a combination
of speed and security purposes (lot of internet traffic on the internet LAN and I want that card locked down to prevent file sharing on it)
By default, both of the cards have their network properties set to public. To date I have not found any way to set the secure LAN card to private and the Internet card to public. If I enable file sharing in the private bit of "advanced settings" and
go to the Metro settings (whatever the fancy name is) under PC Settings/Network/Connections, there is only a generic "network" icon shown (rather than 2 netowrk icons, one for each card). When clicked, this correlates to the network card connected
to the internet. I can make this card public or private by changing the "Find devices and Content" switch on or off but this does not impact the card connected to the secure LAN. I tried disabling the Internet card and re running the setup (which
this time configured the secure LAN card) which I think did allow me to change it to private but as soon as the internet LAN card was re-enabled it reverted to that one being private and my secure LAN to public.
so - The config I am left with is the wrong way round (ie the internet card set to private and my private LAN card set to public!)
Similarly, I tried using regedit. In HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\NetworkList\Profiles\ <Profile ID> I can change the REG_DWORD to 1 or 0 but this only impacts the private / public settings of the card connected to the
internet.
I am guessing that Windows is kind of combining these 2 cards into 1 network profile and there is some priority thing going on that it gives priority to the card connected to the internet in terms of config?
Anyone got any ideas on how to force one card to private and the other to public?
Thanks Guys.
Al.

This is caused by the default security policy which blocks file sharing with unidentified networks by making them public. (How it determines unidentified networks is another interesting question). To allow file sharing, you have to change the local
security policy to allow unidentified networks to be private.
Local Security Policy | Network List Manager Policies |Unidentified Networks
Bill

A question about Routers and network cards

I have a question, Can Hardware confict with internet speed problems with the routers like one having a gigabit etherenet network card and 1/100 intel etherent card?

Ethernet components are generally compatible across brand names, and speeds. So you can connect gigabit cards to 10/100 networks. You can connect 10/100 cards to gigabit networks.
When you mix speeds, you will be limited to the fastest speed that all components can do, so if you connect a gigabit card to a 10/100 network, you will be limited to a 100 Mbps connection.

MULTIPLE LISTENER의 LOAD BALANCING 및 2개의 NETWORK CARD 사용 시 SETUP

제품 : SQL*NET
작성날짜 : 1997-11-24
MULTIPLE LISTENER의 LOAD BALANCING 및 2개의 NETWORK CARD 사용 시 SETUP
=====================================================================
Oracle V7.3의 SQL*Net 2.3의 새로운 기능으로 여러 개의 Listener를 띄우면서
상호 Load Balancing을 유지하는 기능을 소개하고자 한다.
Load Balancing 기능을 이용하여 각각의 Listener와 Oracle Instance 간의
Overloading을 줄일 수 있다.
다음의 예는 하나의 장비 내에 2개의 Network Card가 있을 경우에 대해 setup을
하는 방법이며 만일 하나의 Network Card가 있을 경우는 Host는 하나만 지정
하면 된다.
1. init<SID>.ora file을 지정할 Parameter
MTS_MULTIPLE_LISTENERS=TRUE
COMPATIBLE=7.3.2.0
2. 예를 들어 Listener를 2개 사용하는 경우라면 initSID.ora에
mts_dispatchers="tcp,10"
mts_max_dispatchers=20
mts_servers=20
mts_max_servers=40
mts_service=ORA73
mts_listener_address="(address_list=
(address=(protocol=tcp)(port=1621)(host=152.69.30.100))
mts_listener_address="(address_list=
(address=(protocol=tcp)(port=1622)(host=152.69.30.100))
mts_listener_address="(address_list=
(address=(protocol=tcp)(port=1623)(host=152.69.30.102))
mts_listener_address="(address_list=
(address=(protocol=tcp)(port=1624)(host=152.69.30.102))
3. listener.ora file에 설정되는 내용은
LISTENER1 =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = tcp)
(HOST = 152.69.30.100)
(PORT=1621)
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = tcp)
(HOST = 152.69.30.100)
(PORT=1622)
LISTENER2 =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = tcp)
(HOST = 152.69.30.102)
(PORT=1623)
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = tcp)
(HOST = 152.69.30.102)
(PORT=1624)
SID_LIST_LISTENER1 =
(SID_LIST =
(SID_DESC =
(SID_NAME = ORA73)
(ORACLE_HOME=/oracle2/ora73/app/oracle/product/7.3.2)
SID_LIST_LISTENER2 =
(SID_LIST =
(SID_DESC =
(SID_NAME = ORA73)
(ORACLE_HOME=/oracle2/ora73/app/oracle/product/7.3.2)
STARTUP_WAIT_TIME_LISTENER1 = 0
STARTUP_WAIT_TIME_LISTENER2 = 0
CONNECT_TIMEOUT_LISTENER1 = 0
CONNECT_TIMEOUT_LISTENER2 = 0
4. tnsnames.ora file에 설정되는 내용들
* 다수의 port에 Random하게 접속하는 경우
RANDOM =
(DESCRIPTION_LIST =
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host = 152.69.30.100)
(Port = 1621)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host = 152.69.30.100)
(Port = 1622)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host = 152.69.30.102)
(Port = 1623)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host = 152.69.30.102)
(Port = 1624)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
* 개개의 Port로 접속하는 경우
TORA1 =
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host =krrcsun)
(Port = 1621)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
TORA2 =
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host =krrcsun)
(Port = 1622)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
TORA3 =
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host =krrcsun)
(Port = 1623)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
TORA4 =
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS =
(PROTOCOL = TCP)
(Host =krrcsun)
(Port = 1624)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SID = ORA73)
5. 각각의 Listener를 띄우는 방법
$ lsnrctl start LISTENER1
$ lsnrctl start LISTENER2

Multiple NICs (network cards)

Hi,
Does anyone know how to open a Socket (Datagram) on a specific network card using Java on linux.
Thanks,
Dave

err. ~scratches head~ ~remembers~
cant do it :-)
there is a disputed bug whereby you can only open the socket on all interfaces or just the first one
pretty sure thats how it goes.....
i tried this ages ago ~10 months~ and thats where i decided to leave it since it seemed like it dosent work quite right
brb, ill try to look up the bug report...
dang, lost it
and i was thinking of a ServerSocket
but sounds like the same prob.....

RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the samemachine

Sean,
I mean I am always connecting to the nodemgr of the 2nd environment
successfully. Only when I run the client part of the application that I know
is up, I get a response from the Name Server that it is actually the first
IP address.
I checked again. I defenitely have FORTE_NS_ADDRESS set to IP:5004, in my
case, and not the hostname. I don't have FORTE_LOCATIONS set any where. the
NS_ADDRESS for env2 has only 1 IP address associated with it. My Forte
Control Panel on the client, and hence the NS address has only one entry.
I tried going into escript like you said, and the name service still thinks
it is IP1.
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 1:31 PM
To: Venkat Kodumudi; 'Sean Brown'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same
machine
Hmmmm? That is a little odd! Let me rehash what I think you are saying.
You now have two environments each with their own name service with
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS set to a different IP:Port combination. For example you
are doing the steps:
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS=255.255.255.1:5000
start the nodemgr for env 1
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS=255.255.255.2:5000
start the nodemgr for env 2
Now when you start a client you are always getting the address for env 1
back from the nodemgr. I assume you actually mean the name service? Or, do
you mean you are always connecting to the nodemgr & name service for env
1?
If the first scenario is the case and you are connecting to the nodemgr
for
env 2 but getting back IP's for services listening on the card for env 1 I
would ask you what you are setting the FORTE_LOCATIONS value to before you
start each service. If you are not setting it or are using the host name
it
will register using the IP for the primary network card associated with
the
machine name and I am again assuming that this is env 1. You need to set
the FORTE_LOCATIONS variable to 255.255.255.2:0 (based on the steps above)
before starting your services.
If the second scenario is the case I would have you check what the
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS is set to before you start up the client. Once again it
must be the IP:Port combination not host:port combination if you want to
get
anything other than the primary card.
I would also suggest that you do the following. After everything is up
and
running execute the following commands:
escript -fns "ip for env1":port
findsub nameservice
showpart
What you should see is everything currently registered under the name
service. It will have the name and any "locations" (IP and port) that it
is
registered as listening on. I would look for the nodemgr and see where it
has advertised itself. I would then look for any services you expect to
be
registered there and also verify where the have advertised themselves. If
there are multiple locations listed for any one service, the client will
use
the first one in the list.
Do the same for env 2.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Venkat Kodumudi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 9:57 AM
To: 'Sean Brown'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same machine
I am giving the actual IP address. and not the host name. That is why I
don't understand what is going on.
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 10:53 AM
To: Venkat Kodumudi; 'Sean Brown'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same
machine
Hello Venkat,
I probably should have mentioned this before. Your are correct. Forteis
doing a host lookup if you are providing a name for examplemachine1:5000.
You can bypass the host lookup by using the actual ip dot addressinstead
for example 255.255.255.255:5000. This way you are taking the name
service
out od the picture and Forte will use the address provided.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Venkat Kodumudi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 9:27 AM
To: 'Sean Brown'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same machine
My requirement is that my second card serves as best case performance
testing piece. This eliminates the network completely. We went one step
ahead and created a new enviromnent for the second card. Whatever I do,
the
nodemgr is returning back the IP address of the first card, even thoughmy
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS does not have the first card in the picture any where.
I think Forte is doing a host look up and returning the first IP address
it
finds, as opposed to returning the IP address specified in theenvironment
variable FORTE_NS_ADDRESS. Is there a way to trick it?
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 1998 9:54 AM
To: Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same
machine
OK, you ran into one of the issues. That is, if both addresses areknown
to
the client that is trying to contact the partition it will always usethe
first address in FORTE_LOCATIONS. This is because FORTE_LOCATIONS was
designed more as a failover mechanism. So it will always try the
first
address in the list and if it succeeds, there is no reason to move onto
the
second.
Now, the second issue is that there is currently a problem with theclient
failover to the secondary address in FORTE_LOCATIONS. If the firstentry
fails it is supposed to retry on the second entry. Instead, it
retries
the
first entry again. I know that Forte knows about this but I do nothave
a
bug number on it.
With that said, lets look at a possible solution for you. If the real
objective here is to have a back up network card available for fail
over
on
the same machine, or use one card to advertise outside your firewalland
one
to use inside, then you will have to contact Forte to determine whenthe
failover problem will be fixed. But, if the objective is to loadbalance
across the network cards you could have the environment manager listenon
both ports and then alternate your server partitions across both
cards.
For
example:
set FORTE_NS_ADDRESS=card1:5000;card2:5000 and then start up the
environment
manager
set FORTE_LOCATIONS=card1:0 (the 0 in the port causes the OS to pick a
port)
and start partition one
set FORTE_LOCATIONS=card2:0 and start partition two
and so on....
In this scenario the environment manager will be listening on bothcards
but
each server will be listening on only one of the two cards. So if a
request
comes in for partition1 it will go through card one and if it is for
partition two it will go through card two. You could assign your
partitions
to cards based on expected load.
Well, I am done. I hope this helps!
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Venkat Kodumudi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 1998 8:06 AM
To: 'Sean Brown'; 'John Jamison'
Cc: [email protected]; Jose Suriol
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the samemachine
Sean,
Thanks for your reply. I tried the approach. I was not very specificin
my
question. I do need the ability for server applications to listen and
server
on both the network cards.
I was succesfully able to make the nodemgr listen on both the cardsand
actually serve requests coming in from both the cards. But, followingyour
advise, I took a cautious step with FORTE_LOCATIONS. Here is what I
noticed.
I have an application that has 6 partitions in total. I used
FORTE_LOCATION
to make it listen on 1. Both the cards. 2. Swapped the IP addresses
for
both
cards for this application. 3. One card that I want it to listen on. I
tried
all approaches by exporting the locations variable for just this
application. The nodemgr recieves a request from this pc connected onthe
second card to talk to one of the partitions. The node mgr responds
with
a
proxy - with the ip address and socket number of the first card. The
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS variable looks like this:
IP1:5002;IP2:5002.
Is it possible atall to resolve my problem, without having a seperate
environment?
Thanks
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 1998 10:42 AM
To: 'John Jamison'; Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the
same
machine
Venkat,
Actually, it is possible for Forte to listen on more than one IP andport
combination. The first reply to your message was correct. If you
set
the
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS to contain multiple entries before starting the
name
service, it will advertise on both. For Forte servers you use the
FORTE_LOCATIONS env variable to get it to advertise on multipleip:port
combinations.
We were doing something very similar with another customer I was at
to
get
around a firewall. I will warn you that there are some issues with
FORTE_LOCATIONS that may keep that portion from working. However,
from
reading your note, it appears that all you need is for the nameservice
to
advertise and listen on multiple ports and that works fine. I justtested
it again for sanity sake and it worked. I ran my test on NT using
Forte
3G2.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[<a href="mailto:[email protected]">mailto:[email protected]]On</a> Behalf Of John Jamison
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 1998 4:51 PM
To: Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the samemachine
Venkat,
Technically yes this is possible, though not in Forte. A nameserver
can
only listen on one port.
To implement this scheme you will have to write a proxy service (insome
language
including perhaps forte) which listens on the well-known port on the
second card, reads requests, then forwards them to the realnameservice
(wkp on the first card), and forwards replies back. This is not
trivial, but some firewall toolkit vendors supply stub code to write
application specific proxies.
-J
Venkat Kodumudi wrote:
Folks,
Here is what we would like to do:
We want to have 2 network cards on a unix box - which means I have
2
ip
addresses, and the connection between the two is the unix box and
only
the
unix box. I have a pc connected to the 2nd network card and I want
it
to
connect to the nameserver that is listening on a well known port
on
the
first network card. We don't want to turn IP forwarding between
the
two
cards. We want Forte to address both cards to talk to clients, in
one
environment.
Can this be done? If so how?
Thanks in advance.
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive<URL:<a href=
"http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/">http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/</a>>
>>>>
John Jamison [email protected]
Vice President and Chief Technology Officer
Sage IT Partners, Inc.
Voice: 415 392-7243 x 306
Fax: 415 391-3899
Internet Enabled Business Change
<a href=
"http://www.sageit.com">http://www.sageit.com</a>
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:<a href=
"http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/">http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/</a>>

Hello Venkat,
I probably should have mentioned this before. Your are correct. Forte is
doing a host lookup if you are providing a name for example machine1:5000.
You can bypass the host lookup by using the actual ip dot address instead
for example 255.255.255.255:5000. This way you are taking the name service
out od the picture and Forte will use the address provided.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Venkat Kodumudi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 9:27 AM
To: 'Sean Brown'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same machine
My requirement is that my second card serves as best case performance
testing piece. This eliminates the network completely. We went one step
ahead and created a new enviromnent for the second card. Whatever I do, the
nodemgr is returning back the IP address of the first card, even though my
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS does not have the first card in the picture any where.
I think Forte is doing a host look up and returning the first IP address it
finds, as opposed to returning the IP address specified in the environment
variable FORTE_NS_ADDRESS. Is there a way to trick it?
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 1998 9:54 AM
To: Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same
machine
OK, you ran into one of the issues. That is, if both addresses are known
to
the client that is trying to contact the partition it will always use the
first address in FORTE_LOCATIONS. This is because FORTE_LOCATIONS was
designed more as a failover mechanism. So it will always try the first
address in the list and if it succeeds, there is no reason to move on to
the
second.
Now, the second issue is that there is currently a problem with the client
failover to the secondary address in FORTE_LOCATIONS. If the first entry
fails it is supposed to retry on the second entry. Instead, it retries
the
first entry again. I know that Forte knows about this but I do not have a
bug number on it.
With that said, lets look at a possible solution for you. If the real
objective here is to have a back up network card available for fail over
on
the same machine, or use one card to advertise outside your firewall and
one
to use inside, then you will have to contact Forte to determine when the
failover problem will be fixed. But, if the objective is to load balance
across the network cards you could have the environment manager listen on
both ports and then alternate your server partitions across both cards.
For
example:
set FORTE_NS_ADDRESS=card1:5000;card2:5000 and then start up the
environment
manager
set FORTE_LOCATIONS=card1:0 (the 0 in the port causes the OS to pick a
port)
and start partition one
set FORTE_LOCATIONS=card2:0 and start partition two
and so on....
In this scenario the environment manager will be listening on both cards
but
each server will be listening on only one of the two cards. So if a
request
comes in for partition1 it will go through card one and if it is for
partition two it will go through card two. You could assign your
partitions
to cards based on expected load.
Well, I am done. I hope this helps!
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Venkat Kodumudi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 1998 8:06 AM
To: 'Sean Brown'; 'John Jamison'
Cc: [email protected]; Jose Suriol
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same machine
Sean,
Thanks for your reply. I tried the approach. I was not very specific in
my
question. I do need the ability for server applications to listen and
server
on both the network cards.
I was succesfully able to make the nodemgr listen on both the cards and
actually serve requests coming in from both the cards. But, following your
advise, I took a cautious step with FORTE_LOCATIONS. Here is what I
noticed.
I have an application that has 6 partitions in total. I used
FORTE_LOCATION
to make it listen on 1. Both the cards. 2. Swapped the IP addresses for
both
cards for this application. 3. One card that I want it to listen on. I
tried
all approaches by exporting the locations variable for just this
application. The nodemgr recieves a request from this pc connected on the
second card to talk to one of the partitions. The node mgr responds with a
proxy - with the ip address and socket number of the first card. The
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS variable looks like this:
IP1:5002;IP2:5002.
Is it possible atall to resolve my problem, without having a seperate
environment?
Thanks
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 1998 10:42 AM
To: 'John Jamison'; Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same
machine
Venkat,
Actually, it is possible for Forte to listen on more than one IP andport
combination. The first reply to your message was correct. If you setthe
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS to contain multiple entries before starting the name
service, it will advertise on both. For Forte servers you use the
FORTE_LOCATIONS env variable to get it to advertise on multiple ip:port
combinations.
We were doing something very similar with another customer I was at toget
around a firewall. I will warn you that there are some issues with
FORTE_LOCATIONS that may keep that portion from working. However, from
reading your note, it appears that all you need is for the name serviceto
advertise and listen on multiple ports and that works fine. I justtested
it again for sanity sake and it worked. I ran my test on NT using Forte
3G2.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[<a href="mailto:[email protected]">mailto:[email protected]]On</a> Behalf Of John Jamison
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 1998 4:51 PM
To: Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same machine
Venkat,
Technically yes this is possible, though not in Forte. A name server
can
only listen on one port.
To implement this scheme you will have to write a proxy service (in some
language
including perhaps forte) which listens on the well-known port on the
second card, reads requests, then forwards them to the real nameservice
(wkp on the first card), and forwards replies back. This is not
trivial, but some firewall toolkit vendors supply stub code to write
application specific proxies.
-J
Venkat Kodumudi wrote:
Folks,
Here is what we would like to do:
We want to have 2 network cards on a unix box - which means I have 2ip
addresses, and the connection between the two is the unix box and onlythe
unix box. I have a pc connected to the 2nd network card and I want it
to
connect to the nameserver that is listening on a well known port onthe
first network card. We don't want to turn IP forwarding between thetwo
cards. We want Forte to address both cards to talk to clients, in one
environment.
Can this be done? If so how?
Thanks in advance.
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive<URL:<a href=
"http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/">http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/</a>>
>>
John Jamison [email protected]
Vice President and Chief Technology Officer
Sage IT Partners, Inc.
Voice: 415 392-7243 x 306
Fax: 415 391-3899
Internet Enabled Business Change
<a href="http://www.sageit.com">http://www.sageit.com</a>
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:<a href=
"http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/">http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/</a>>

Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the samemachine

Folks,
Here is what we would like to do:
We want to have 2 network cards on a unix box - which means I have 2 ip
addresses, and the connection between the two is the unix box and only the
unix box. I have a pc connected to the 2nd network card and I want it to
connect to the nameserver that is listening on a well known port on the
first network card. We don't want to turn IP forwarding between the two
cards. We want Forte to address both cards to talk to clients, in one
environment.
Can this be done? If so how?
Thanks in advance.
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/>

Hmmmm? That is a little odd! Let me rehash what I think you are saying.
You now have two environments each with their own name service with
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS set to a different IP:Port combination. For example you
are doing the steps:
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS=255.255.255.1:5000
start the nodemgr for env 1
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS=255.255.255.2:5000
start the nodemgr for env 2
Now when you start a client you are always getting the address for env 1
back from the nodemgr. I assume you actually mean the name service? Or, do
you mean you are always connecting to the nodemgr & name service for env 1?
If the first scenario is the case and you are connecting to the nodemgr for
env 2 but getting back IP's for services listening on the card for env 1 I
would ask you what you are setting the FORTE_LOCATIONS value to before you
start each service. If you are not setting it or are using the host name it
will register using the IP for the primary network card associated with the
machine name and I am again assuming that this is env 1. You need to set
the FORTE_LOCATIONS variable to 255.255.255.2:0 (based on the steps above)
before starting your services.
If the second scenario is the case I would have you check what the
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS is set to before you start up the client. Once again it
must be the IP:Port combination not host:port combination if you want to get
anything other than the primary card.
I would also suggest that you do the following. After everything is up and
running execute the following commands:
escript -fns "ip for env1":port
findsub nameservice
showpart
What you should see is everything currently registered under the name
service. It will have the name and any "locations" (IP and port) that it is
registered as listening on. I would look for the nodemgr and see where it
has advertised itself. I would then look for any services you expect to be
registered there and also verify where the have advertised themselves. If
there are multiple locations listed for any one service, the client will use
the first one in the list.
Do the same for env 2.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Venkat Kodumudi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 9:57 AM
To: 'Sean Brown'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same machine
I am giving the actual IP address. and not the host name. That is why I
don't understand what is going on.
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 10:53 AM
To: Venkat Kodumudi; 'Sean Brown'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same
machine
Hello Venkat,
I probably should have mentioned this before. Your are correct. Forte is
doing a host lookup if you are providing a name for example machine1:5000.
You can bypass the host lookup by using the actual ip dot address instead
for example 255.255.255.255:5000. This way you are taking the name
service
out od the picture and Forte will use the address provided.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Venkat Kodumudi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 9:27 AM
To: 'Sean Brown'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same machine
My requirement is that my second card serves as best case performance
testing piece. This eliminates the network completely. We went one step
ahead and created a new enviromnent for the second card. Whatever I do,
the
nodemgr is returning back the IP address of the first card, even though my
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS does not have the first card in the picture any where.
I think Forte is doing a host look up and returning the first IP address
it
finds, as opposed to returning the IP address specified in the environment
variable FORTE_NS_ADDRESS. Is there a way to trick it?
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 1998 9:54 AM
To: Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same
machine
OK, you ran into one of the issues. That is, if both addresses areknown
to
the client that is trying to contact the partition it will always usethe
first address in FORTE_LOCATIONS. This is because FORTE_LOCATIONS was
designed more as a failover mechanism. So it will always try the first
address in the list and if it succeeds, there is no reason to move on to
the
second.
Now, the second issue is that there is currently a problem with theclient
failover to the secondary address in FORTE_LOCATIONS. If the firstentry
fails it is supposed to retry on the second entry. Instead, it retries
the
first entry again. I know that Forte knows about this but I do not havea
bug number on it.
With that said, lets look at a possible solution for you. If the real
objective here is to have a back up network card available for fail over
on
the same machine, or use one card to advertise outside your firewall and
one
to use inside, then you will have to contact Forte to determine when the
failover problem will be fixed. But, if the objective is to loadbalance
across the network cards you could have the environment manager listenon
both ports and then alternate your server partitions across both cards.
For
example:
set FORTE_NS_ADDRESS=card1:5000;card2:5000 and then start up the
environment
manager
set FORTE_LOCATIONS=card1:0 (the 0 in the port causes the OS to pick a
port)
and start partition one
set FORTE_LOCATIONS=card2:0 and start partition two
and so on....
In this scenario the environment manager will be listening on both cards
but
each server will be listening on only one of the two cards. So if a
request
comes in for partition1 it will go through card one and if it is for
partition two it will go through card two. You could assign your
partitions
to cards based on expected load.
Well, I am done. I hope this helps!
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: Venkat Kodumudi [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 1998 8:06 AM
To: 'Sean Brown'; 'John Jamison'
Cc: [email protected]; Jose Suriol
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same machine
Sean,
Thanks for your reply. I tried the approach. I was not very specific in
my
question. I do need the ability for server applications to listen and
server
on both the network cards.
I was succesfully able to make the nodemgr listen on both the cards and
actually serve requests coming in from both the cards. But, followingyour
advise, I took a cautious step with FORTE_LOCATIONS. Here is what I
noticed.
I have an application that has 6 partitions in total. I used
FORTE_LOCATION
to make it listen on 1. Both the cards. 2. Swapped the IP addresses for
both
cards for this application. 3. One card that I want it to listen on. I
tried
all approaches by exporting the locations variable for just this
application. The nodemgr recieves a request from this pc connected onthe
second card to talk to one of the partitions. The node mgr responds witha
proxy - with the ip address and socket number of the first card. The
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS variable looks like this:
IP1:5002;IP2:5002.
Is it possible atall to resolve my problem, without having a seperate
environment?
Thanks
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Brown [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 1998 10:42 AM
To: 'John Jamison'; Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the same
machine
Venkat,
Actually, it is possible for Forte to listen on more than one IP andport
combination. The first reply to your message was correct. If you setthe
FORTE_NS_ADDRESS to contain multiple entries before starting the name
service, it will advertise on both. For Forte servers you use the
FORTE_LOCATIONS env variable to get it to advertise on multiple
ip:port
combinations.
We were doing something very similar with another customer I was at toget
around a firewall. I will warn you that there are some issues with
FORTE_LOCATIONS that may keep that portion from working. However,
from
reading your note, it appears that all you need is for the nameservice
to
advertise and listen on multiple ports and that works fine. I justtested
it again for sanity sake and it worked. I ran my test on NT using
Forte
3G2.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[<a href="mailto:[email protected]">mailto:[email protected]]On</a> Behalf Of John Jamison
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 1998 4:51 PM
To: Venkat Kodumudi
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Is there a way to have 2 network cards on the samemachine
Venkat,
Technically yes this is possible, though not in Forte. A nameserver
can
only listen on one port.
To implement this scheme you will have to write a proxy service (insome
language
including perhaps forte) which listens on the well-known port on the
second card, reads requests, then forwards them to the realnameservice
(wkp on the first card), and forwards replies back. This is not
trivial, but some firewall toolkit vendors supply stub code to write
application specific proxies.
-J
Venkat Kodumudi wrote:
Folks,
Here is what we would like to do:
We want to have 2 network cards on a unix box - which means I have 2
ip
addresses, and the connection between the two is the unix box and
only
the
unix box. I have a pc connected to the 2nd network card and I want
it
to
connect to the nameserver that is listening on a well known port onthe
first network card. We don't want to turn IP forwarding between thetwo
cards. We want Forte to address both cards to talk to clients, in
one
environment.
Can this be done? If so how?
Thanks in advance.
Venkat Kodumudi
Price Waterhouse LLP
Internet: [email protected]
Internet2: [email protected]
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive<URL:<a href=
"http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/">http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/</a>>
>>>
John Jamison [email protected]
Vice President and Chief Technology Officer
Sage IT Partners, Inc.
Voice: 415 392-7243 x 306
Fax: 415 391-3899
Internet Enabled Business Change
<a href=
"http://www.sageit.com">http://www.sageit.com</a>
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:<a href=
"http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/">http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/</a>>

Teamed network cards for domain controllers?

can someone help me to resolve a debate we have: my colleage states that domain controllers (in our case Win2003SP2) should "not" have their network cards teamed for high availability (via HP's NIC teaming software).? I've not heard of this and cannot Bing/Google anything like this. I'm under the impression that a domain controller "should" have it's gigabit NICs teamed to make sure that directory services are highly available.
any information on this would be great. thanks...Peter A. Berger Jr.

Fault Tolerance and Network Teaming
                Anyone who has called Microsoft for help with a networking problem has likely heard the question: "Are you using network teaming?" I have often heard this referred to by Microsoft's customers as a "quick out" or an excuse that Microsoft was looking to pass the responsibility on to someone else. As someone that has been on both ends of the phone, and at the highest escalation point within Microsoft's Network queues I can tell you that it is a question born of wisdom and tempered with experience. While working the phones at Microsoft, supporting the largest and most critical systems in the US it was rare to ever get a call about the same problem more than once. Even more rare was for everyone on our group to get the same calls, and have the same experiences. I recall it happening when we fought the blaster worm, and when Microsoft's "Scalable Networking Pack" was released with 2003 SP2. These were bad, but a few months went by and except for a few straggles the phone calls stopped, the world got wise to the issue and the problem was resolved. I was amazed though to experience 1-3 calls a week with network issues CAUSED by network teaming. I could not help but be blown away by the irony of a program meant to avoid network failure so often causing it. I talked to colleagues, (of which I have found no better single source in the industry than at Microsoft), and found that even the old timers having more than 15 years with the company had the same stories of problems caused by networking teaming as we are constantly experiencing today. I am amazed that an industry as wise and agile as the computer industry has been (and is), has stuck with such a poor technology. I always asked my customers as the called with problems, usually critical ones, "What is teaming these network cards getting you". Almost unanimously the answer would come fault tolerance, to which I would reply rhetorically "How often do you NICs or Switches fail and how often has teaming caused network failure?" In my opinion, it is unforgivable for an application to constantly cause the problem that it is written to avoid. It should cause pause and reflection as to whether the technology is well suited for its function, whether it is just written poorly or if all of its implementations have similar problems. Technology today is beyond network teaming. There are far better methods of providing fault tolerance with manual and automatic failover. Most application writers have taken into consideration fault tolerance at the service level superseding anything that network teaming offers, so that network teaming should be a dead technology, because it is killing us.
                Finally, if you are considering using network teaming, or have had reason to reconsider its use, maybe these questions will help your assessment:
                What is my goal with using network teaming?
                Can I gain Availability through use of a more capable NIC card?
                How often have my NIC cards failed?
                When NIC cards have failed were they the only failure, or was it in conjunction with a Motherboard or other failure causing the service to be unavailable?
                What are my needs for uptime for these services?
                Would a manual failover (the simplest of options) be viable for this service?
                What options for automatic failover do I have (since most applications can have multiple providers through configuration)?
                One other note to add. While working on the phones at Microsoft, and later as a consultant to large and federal organizations, I found one thing that seemed to be true most of the time. When a problem occurred, it was rarely the OS itself, but something unnatural to its processes. Simplicity and minimalism is really one of the keys to a healthy server and environment. Often it is necessary to introduce other applications and services, but I do not think near as often as we do.
Note: MSFT does not support network teaming, because they do not own the software that provides it. In certain instances though, like with OCS, they flat out will not support OCS if teaming is enabled on the server.
Note2: I realize my comments above are very general, and so I want to apply these to this exact question. When I consider AD and how to make it fault tolerant, I cannot help but realize that the protocols, clients and services that make up Directory Services, are beautifully fault tolerant. In most cases, the loss of any one DC would not greatly affect the user's ability to authenticate to a computer or service within the domain. Even more, Directory services is inherently so fault tolerant that it can still function with the loss of a major part of the servers that make it up.
Don't forget to give credit where credit is due, vote this as helpful if it helped you.

Help with purchasing correct network card

Hi, I'm trying to set up a wireless network for a friend who has an IBook G3 purchased in December 2002 which I know makes it very old. I have a 802.11g wireless ADSL router successfully set up and the IBook can connect to the internet successfully through a standard network cable to the router.
I would like to connect to the router wirelessly so I would appreciate some guidance on the correct network card to buy for this model
IBook G3 PowerPC Model A1005 Mac OS X (10.2.x)

Welcome, Kosh-vorion
first check with the system profiler (Apple->"Abouth this Mac"->"more Info")then "network"->Airport card
whether there is already an airport card build in. if not, you need to buy it and install it; i don't know whether this is easy or not for an iBook to install. There is a manual here:
http://manuals.info.apple.com/en/iBookG3_14inchUserGuideMultilingual.PDF
but i'm not sure whether it is exactly your model. (search the Apple supprt pages, if it isn't).
cost of the Airport card is something like 50 $.
If it is already installed, go to "system preferences"-> network and setup.
Post back, if you have more questions.
success,
Thomas

Switch to second network card

Hi
SBS 2011.
The dell server has two network cards and one is disabled. Now the active card seems to be causing issues. What are the steps to reliably switch to the second network card?
Thanks
Regards

Hi:
SBS 2011 will respond normally to a switch in nics. See this thread from this forum:
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/753700f8-3fe0-4b8b-a91e-25860ff13191/best-method-to-replace-network-adapter-in-sbs-2011?forum=smallbusinessserver
Larry Struckmeyer[MVP] If your question is answered please mark the response as the answer so that others can benefit.

How do I get DNS searchs to span multiple network interaces?

Each of our developer machines have two network cards. One is attached to the corporate network the other to a private network. There is a DNS server running on both networks. On our windows boxes we have no trouble doing something like
ping <device-name-on-corporate-network>
ping <device-name-on-private-network>
On our newly purchased Mac Minis running Mavericks 10.9.2 it doesn't work the same way.
If the service order has the corporate network above the private network then the ping of the corporate device name works but the ping of the private device name doesn't.
If I swtich the service order so the private network is above the corporate network then the ping of the private device name works but not the coporate one.
From what I am seeing I believe that on the Macs when a DNS lookup request failure is returned by the DNS server associated with highest active network in the service order list the DNS server associated with next highest active network in the service order is not being sent a DNS lookup request. Is this correct or am I missing a setting someplace?

I found another the solution was already posted in response to the following question in the discussions group.
https://discussions.apple.com/message/15095747#15095747
"Network Service Order Causing Conflict with Private DNS on Local Network"
KJB_

Multiple Network Card Question

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for