| Home | Register | Members | Search | Links |
 |
| Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
| |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Jay wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the responses. > > From some reading I found the following _might_ be the problem: Reverse > DNS lookups (even for local addresses - 192.168.x.x) timing out with > the ISP's nameservers. This problem also comes up when I SSH into the > box via VPN - after giving the password, it takes a few seconds (<10) > to get to the prompt. They _should_ time out -- this is good  > If I do a traceroute from the Linux box (192.168.2.253) to the Windows > system (192.168.2.254), it is painfully slow, eventhough it is only one > hop -- Still no $ /sbin/route -n output or explicit confirmation that .253 and ..254 are on the same subnet. Presume so. Means there are _no_ hops between them. None of their frames to each other should enter a router. Just ARP, build an ethernet frame, and ship off the packets. > # traceroute 192.168.2.254 > traceroute to 192.168.2.254 (192.168.2.254), 30 hops max, 38 byte > packets > <<-- 15 sec delay -->> > 1 192.168.2.254 (192.168.2.254) 0.160 ms 0.162 ms 0.093 ms > > The packets I captured with tcpdump show that for the traceroute above, > it queries the two DNS servers at the ISP... after the first server > times-out, I see an ARP request "who has 192.168.2.254? Tell > 192.168.2.253". Then for some reason, it queries the second DNS server, > and obviously that times-out as well. For the traceroute, it indicates broken route tables or TCP settings. My vote is broken route table(s). Or one _really_ messed up firewall. Because you have provided no local means to resolve the _names_ the DNS servers of the ISP are consulted (that's what your resolv.conf said to do). > When I rename the file /etc/resolv.conf - everything speeds up. The > apps on Tomcat are as fast as possible, and the traceroute to Windows > is also fast. Did you clear the ARP caches of all the hosts before "testing"? Not being able to see your routing tables on the hosts I cannot give you any confident answer -- so I offer none. Your resolv.conf is vanilla -- you don't need the search term if it's left blank. Boinking source? You never know. > Also, when I add the windows box's IP to the /etc/hosts file, the > delays between the systems is gone. That's what the hosts file is for -- name resolution. At one time they were used and maintained by "hand" on the _entire_ internet. How times change > However, I am not sure if either of these (renaming resolv.conf or > adding _all_ local systems to the hosts file) are the right way to fix > the problem or avoid future issues. What populates resolv.conf? DHCP server? You? Except to say you need it now or will some day, I can't really offer an answer. My RH resolv.conf file reads like this (populated via DHCP): ; generated by /sbin/dhclient-script nameserver 24.204.0.4 nameserver 24.204.0.5 That's the whole thing -- every byte, nothing added. Did you edit or add anything to the output below? The banners? Is that the exact file? /etc/hosts is a perfectly viable solution if you can mangage the files on each host on your lan. The link I gave you is based on them but can provide better service across subnets and acts as a DNS cache -- fewer lookups at the ISP. > I read online some instructions on editing the named.conf file, but > would like to be sure if that is the way to go... I don't have this > file, though I do have a named.custom file. Any pointers? For a lan of modest size named is overkill -- you'll spend more time setting it up, maintaining it, understanding it than you'll ever spend with something like dnsmasq. Modest is, say, < 50, depending on physical location/spread and how valuable is an excuse to get out from the desk. Might even go to 100 if it allowed me to meet interesting co-workers ;-) Once you've built your hosts files and placed them they are not likely to change that much -- one or two, here and there, now and then. They can provide an avenue for mischief, but I've never had any problems with them. > Following are some of the files: > > --- begin /etc/resolv.conf--- > nameserver 205.171.3.65 > nameserver 198.6.1.3 > search > --- end /etc/resolv.conf--- > > --- begin /etc/hosts (real domain name replaced by xx) --- > # Do not remove the following line, or various programs > # that require network functionality will fail. > 127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain localhost > 192.168.2.253 oakdev02.xx.com oakdev02 > --- end /etc/hosts --- > [snip] I would go with /etc/hosts if possible. I would make sure I understood very well the ins-n-outs of bind's setup if I _needed_ to _deploy_ it. My first efforts would be to find a means not to need it Get itjust a little wrong and you can mess up a network real fast -- with the press of an ON button. hth, prg email above disabled |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Routing - Computers on either subnet have problems finding PCs on the other subnet | ZZYZX | Windows Networking | 2 | 03-26-2011 01:01 AM |
| How to setup /etc/hosts to lookup DHCP client in the same subnet | Wonder | Linux Networking | 4 | 09-12-2006 09:22 PM |
| 100% CPU Utilization caused by process 'System', with User SYSTEM | Phillip N Rounds | Windows Networking | 3 | 09-12-2005 07:03 PM |
| Slow DSL Download Speed on WinMe System, Fast on Win2K System | Cistan Jones | Windows Networking | 4 | 01-03-2004 08:13 AM |
| subnet to subnet routing question | S James | Linux Networking | 0 | 09-04-2003 03:37 PM |
Linear Mode
