From: "Rod Gasson" 

"Bob Lawrence" 
wrote in message
news:1087079263{at}p12.f610.n712.z3.ftn...


>  That business of terminating the cable has always amused me. There
> is no reason to terminate a short cable, the reflections at 100MHz
> will be stuff-all under about 10-metres, and with that silly thin
> cable they use, the losses are so great that any reflection will be
> lost at anything *over* that!

Amusing or not, when I set up my first 'network' (2 computers) I (foolishly)
thought I'd be able to plug the coax (1metre) straight into the cards (No
"T" adapters, not terminators) and needless to say it didn't work.

It took me much experimenting before I discovered I needed the "T" at BOTH
ends, and that both ends needed to be terminated before it would work.

> RG> Incidently, most modern network cards (including the cheap
> RG> $10-$15 ones, based on the RTL8139 chipset) support 100Mhz (ie,
> RG> 100base-x).
>
>  I know... and it really is fast!

Not as fast as the lastest 1gig cards :-)

> RG> Oh, don't forget DNS when performing ping tests. Unless you
> RG> have a working/accessable DNS you'll need to use the IP numbers
> RG> when pinging because if you use host names you'll probably get
> RG> a 'host not found' error.
>
>  Windows uses DHCP, and so does Linux,

Not all Linux distros do DCHP be default.
I've no idea when Windoze enabled it by default. (win2k perhaps?)

> but the weird part is that
> Windows uses 169.254.0.0 as their LAN and Linux uses 192.168.0.0!

See my previous response to this question.

>  The more I see of Linux, the less funny the fuckwits running it
> become. It is easy to understand why Gates owns 99% of the O/S market
> when Linux is the main competition.

You've twisted the facts a little Bob.  Windoze has 99% of the *desktop*
market. The *nix variations account for 80% or more of the *server* market.

> RG> Also check your routing tables. If your routes aren't set up
> RG> correctly you'll get a 'no route to host' error message.
>
>  ROFL! You're kidding, aren't you? Routing tables and there are only
> two computers! ROFL!! Good one, Rod.

I assume by this thoughtless remark that you are under the mistaken
impression that routing tables aren't required if only two machines are
connected?  If so, once again you are showing your ignorance in regards to
networking.

> That's the sort of unhelful crap
> I've been handling all week,

OK, so it turned out to be useless information in your instance. You were
having problems, you asked for help, and I gave you several possibilites.  I
wasn't expecting you to have made EVERY mistake a person could possibly
make, but at least I tried to cover all the bases you ungreatful ingrate.

For YOUR *future* reference though,  had you enabled DHCP on your windoze
box, which would have assigned  a 169.x.x.x number,  and then used the
general default settings on your Linux box, and got a 172.x.x.x number, the
two machines would have no connectivity unless you either assigned a default
route, or a specific route for either of the addresses.

No need to treat me as the idiot because you managed to avoid a mistake that
many others have made in the past.

> but having read a few hundred pages of
> it, and having spent time in a Uni course doing the same thing, I
> am now immune to stupid confusions like that. As Rod Speed might
> say: try harder, boy.

Screw you.

Rod








--- ifmail v.2.15