tim@comcon.UUCP (Tim Brown) (11/20/90)
Platform: ISC2.2 12M RAM TCP, NFS, X(ISC's) WD8003 I have a strange problem. I recently installed nfs on (prior to this) a pretty stable system. Right after nfs was installed all was well for a day or two then for no reason I can discern, it started acting weird. I will describe the symptoms, but note: the system *was* functioning perfectly, all features were working well. Telnet worked, so did X, so did PCI and so did nfs. What it is doing now is pci complains about not being able to find my hostname in /etc/hosts (tho it is there) and the lockd complains about something similiar to do with the hostname being wrong. Now the really weird part, if I telnet to one of the other hosts (a 6000) using the *internet* address it works but if I try to do it using the hostname, it hangs. Ditto for ping. If I ping another host using the hostname it hangs, but using the internet address it works. I haven't a clue here because right after I installed nfs and tested everything I sucessfully mounted filesystems from the other host, mailed messages and could telnet in both directions. If I telnet from the other host all is ok even now. Hostname returns the correct hostname. Any ideas? -- Tim Brown | Computer Connection | uunet!seaeast.wa.com!comcon!tim |
ross@contact.uucp (Ross Ridge) (11/23/90)
In article <532@comcon.UUCP> tim@comcon.UUCP (Tim Brown) writes: >Platform: > ISC2.2 12M RAM > TCP, NFS, X(ISC's) > WD8003 > >What it is doing now is pci complains about not being able to find my >hostname in /etc/hosts (tho it is there) and the lockd complains about >something similiar to do with the hostname being wrong. Now the >really weird part, if I telnet to one of the other hosts (a 6000) >using the *internet* address it works but if I try to do it using the >hostname, it hangs. Ditto for ping. If I ping another host using the >hostname it hangs, but using the internet address it works. I haven't >a clue here because right after I installed nfs and tested everything >I sucessfully mounted filesystems from the other host, mailed messages >and could telnet in both directions. > >Hostname returns the correct hostname. Assuming you are *not* running /etc/named (the BIND daemon), make sure /etc/resolv.conf has the one line "nonameserver". With IP, NFS, and X all running you'll also likely want to increase NSTREAM and NQUEUE in the kernel, you can use "netstat -m" to get idea of your resource usage. Ross Ridge -- Ross Ridge // "The Great HTMU" [oo] ross@contact.uucp -()- ross@watcsc.waterloo.edu //
elsn4000@mailgzrz.tu-berlin.de (Frank Elsner) (11/23/90)
In article <532@comcon.UUCP> tim@comcon.UUCP (Tim Brown) writes: >What it is doing now is pci complains about not being able to find my >hostname in /etc/hosts (tho it is there) and the lockd complains about >something similiar to do with the hostname being wrong. Now the >really weird part, if I telnet to one of the other hosts (a 6000) >using the *internet* address it works but if I try to do it using the >hostname, it hangs. Ditto for ping. If I ping another host using the I would guess the problem is the Domain Name Service (DNS). Its usage is activated by the file /etc/resolv.conf. If this file contains the one and only line "nonameserver" you may run into the problems described. File resolv.conf should contain on the first line the domain you're in and in subsequent lines the IP addresses of the NameServers to ask. My /etc/resolv.conf reads: domain zrz.tu-berlin.de nameserver 130.149.4.10 nameserver 130.149.5.4 Frank
mark@gizzmo.UUCP (mark hilliard) (11/23/90)
In article <50@mailgzrz.tu-berlin.de> elsn4000@mailgzrz.tu-berlin.de (Frank Elsner) writes: >In article <532@comcon.UUCP> tim@comcon.UUCP (Tim Brown) writes: >>hostname in /etc/hosts (tho it is there) and the lockd complains about >>something similiar to do with the hostname being wrong. Now the >>really weird part, if I telnet to one of the other hosts (a 6000) >>using the *internet* address it works but if I try to do it using the >>hostname, it hangs. >I would guess the problem is the Domain Name Service (DNS). Its usage is >activated by the file /etc/resolv.conf. If this file contains the one and >only line "nonameserver" you may run into the problems described. If you are NOT using a name server ANYTHING BUT 'nonameserver' in /etc/resolv.conf will cause tcp to look for IP addresses at a remote location and will blow up. I have personally had this problem. If you are running Interactive and use their mail setup program under sysadm, the resolv.conf is built WRONG! Go take a look at it and make sure that it says ONLY nonameserver if you do not have access to one. If there is a nameserver on your network, then you must have your systems entered into its databases before it will know about you. Even having a domain line in resolv.conf will cause tcp to not look in the hosts file. I know that this is not the way host lookup is supposed to work, but in the 8 systems I have built in a stand alone network, this is the only way I could get them talking vi the hosts file. I also have 2 systems on our main network with nameserver access. For these systems, I had to put a domain and nameserver entry in resolv.conf. -- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ | Mark Hilliard, N2HHR | AWK is not just a | | Fax 315-986-5882 | LANGUAGE | | mark@gizzmo.kodak.com | It is a way of LIFE! |
jdeitch@jadpc.cts.com (Jim Deitch) (11/24/90)
In article <109@gizzmo.UUCP> mark@gizzmo.UUCP (mark hilliard) writes: >In article <50@mailgzrz.tu-berlin.de> elsn4000@mailgzrz.tu-berlin.de (Frank Elsner) writes: >>In article <532@comcon.UUCP> tim@comcon.UUCP (Tim Brown) writes: >>>hostname in /etc/hosts (tho it is there) and the lockd complains about >>>something similiar to do with the hostname being wrong. Now the >>>really weird part, if I telnet to one of the other hosts (a 6000) >>>using the *internet* address it works but if I try to do it using the >>>hostname, it hangs. >>I would guess the problem is the Domain Name Service (DNS). Its usage is >>activated by the file /etc/resolv.conf. If this file contains the one and >>only line "nonameserver" you may run into the problems described. > >If you are NOT using a name server ANYTHING BUT 'nonameserver' in >/etc/resolv.conf will cause tcp to look for IP addresses at a remote location >and will blow up. I have personally had this problem. If you are running >Interactive and use their mail setup program under sysadm, the resolv.conf >is built WRONG! Go take a look at it and make sure that it says ONLY >nonameserver if you do not have access to one. If there is a nameserver on >your network, then you must have your systems entered into its databases >before it will know about you. Even having a domain line in resolv.conf will >cause tcp to not look in the hosts file. I know that this is not the way >host lookup is supposed to work, but in the 8 systems I have built in a stand >alone network, this is the only way I could get them talking vi the hosts file. > >I also have 2 systems on our main network with nameserver access. For these >systems, I had to put a domain and nameserver entry in resolv.conf. >-- Boy, I whish people would think about what they write before typing. If you are NOT using a nameserver, you MUST have an entry defining your domain. The second line in the file resolv.conf will be nonameserver. Don't believe me? Ask any sysadm that has both SYSV and BSD systems under them and you will see. Still don't believe me? Turn to the manual page resolver(5) and read up friend. If you have the nonameserver line after a defined domain name server, then it will use /etc/hosts when the domain server request times out. Still don't believe me? I regularly switch between the 2, inserting the nameserver when I want my host to resolve the name for me. Still don't believe me? TRY IT! What is the node name of your system? If the domain is specified in it, then you have a problem. All that is supposed to be in there is the NODE NAME, not the fully qualified DOMAIN name. If your systems work without specifying your domain in the resolv.conf file, then you have a major installation problem. How are they going to be able to tell the difference between junk.dom.com and junk ? Could make for some interesting activity on the internet! Jim -- ARPANET: jadpc!jdeitch@nosc.mil INTERNET: jdeitch@jadpc.cts.com UUCP: nosc!jadpc!jdeitch
mark@gizzmo.UUCP (mark hilliard) (11/25/90)
In article <1990Nov24.041255.24657@jadpc.cts.com> jdeitch@jadpc.cts.com (Jim Deitch) writes: > >Boy, I whish people would think about what they write before typing. > >If you are NOT using a nameserver, you MUST have an entry defining >your domain. The second line in the file resolv.conf will be >nonameserver. > >Don't believe me? Ask any sysadm that has both SYSV and BSD systems >under them and you will see. Still don't believe me? Turn to the >manual page resolver(5) and read up friend. Lighten up! If you read the man for resolver(5) you will see that you DO NOT have to put in a domain. It will default out to the root. Even in a large networked environment, this will work. I am not a expert on network administration, but the entry that I recommended in the previous posting was derived at by spending several hours on the phone with Interactive's network guru's, and more importantly, it works (for me at least!). Setting up my little network here at kodak was not the easiest thing that I have done, and when tied into kodak's VERY LARGE backbone, I ran into lots of problems and the whole thing became a muddied nightmare. I envy your savvy on administrating your network, but not all of us are at that level yet. Constructive critisism is fine here, and we ALL can benifit from the input, but negitive critisism tends to turn people off, even if you are right. -- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ | Mark Hilliard, N2HHR | AWK is not just a | | Fax 315-986-5882 | LANGUAGE | | mark@gizzmo.kodak.com | It is a way of LIFE! |
jdeitch@jadpc.cts.com (Jim Deitch) (11/25/90)
In article <110@gizzmo.UUCP> mark@gizzmo.UUCP (mark hilliard) writes: >In article <1990Nov24.041255.24657@jadpc.cts.com> jdeitch@jadpc.cts.com (Jim Deitch) writes: >> > >>Boy, I whish people would think about what they write before typing. > >> >>If you are NOT using a nameserver, you MUST have an entry defining >>your domain. The second line in the file resolv.conf will be >>nonameserver. >> >>Don't believe me? Ask any sysadm that has both SYSV and BSD systems >>under them and you will see. Still don't believe me? Turn to the >>manual page resolver(5) and read up friend. > >Lighten up! If you read the man for resolver(5) you will see that you >DO NOT have to put in a domain. It will default out to the root. Even in >a large networked environment, this will work. I am not a expert on >network administration, but the entry that I recommended in the previous >posting was derived at by spending several hours on the phone with >Interactive's network guru's, and more importantly, it works (for me at >least!). Setting up my little network here at kodak was not the easiest >thing that I have done, and when tied into kodak's VERY LARGE backbone, >I ran into lots of problems and the whole thing became a muddied nightmare. >I envy your savvy on administrating your network, but not all of us are >at that level yet. Constructive critisism is fine here, and we ALL can >benifit from the input, but negitive critisism tends to turn people off, >even if you are right. >-- Mark, If you reread your original posting, you will sense the same kind of message from it that I did. That is that you are an expert at building networks and have done this MANY times before. Let me ask you this, is it worse to give bad advice or no advice at all? His problem can be a little more complicated than a problem with a disk drive or such. If he has a problem with the machine and it is hooked to the internet, he can waste a lot of already sparse bandwith. As far as the IT WORKS FOR ME! in your message above, maybe you should have put it in your original posting instead of the way you stated your "IT WORKS FOR ME" original posting. If you want to discuss this further, please let's use email, no sense wasting net bandwith because we have a mis-understanding. Jim -- ARPANET: jadpc!jdeitch@nosc.mil INTERNET: jdeitch@jadpc.cts.com UUCP: nosc!jadpc!jdeitch
mjhammel@Kepler.dell.com (Michael J. Hammel) (11/27/90)
In article <50@mailgzrz.tu-berlin.de>, elsn4000@mailgzrz.tu-berlin.de (Frank Elsner) writes: > In article <532@comcon.UUCP> tim@comcon.UUCP (Tim Brown) writes: > >What it is doing now is pci complains about not being able to find my > >hostname in /etc/hosts (tho it is there) and the lockd complains about > >something similiar to do with the hostname being wrong. Now the > >really weird part, if I telnet to one of the other hosts (a 6000) > >using the *internet* address it works but if I try to do it using the > >hostname, it hangs. Ditto for ping. If I ping another host using the > I would guess the problem is the Domain Name Service (DNS). Its usage is > activated by the file /etc/resolv.conf. If this file contains the one and > only line "nonameserver" you may run into the problems described. > File resolv.conf should contain on the first line the domain you're in and > in subsequent lines the IP addresses of the NameServers to ask. > > My /etc/resolv.conf reads: > domain zrz.tu-berlin.de > nameserver 130.149.4.10 > nameserver 130.149.5.4 Um, I think this is backwards. If he has "nonameserver" in his resolv.conf then the hostname database will look in /etc/hosts for the host in question. If that host is there (which it apparently is) then "telnet hostname" should work. If resolv.conf lists name servers to search and they don't have hostname listed then the above problem *might* show up (although I think if the nameservers don't find it, the database will still look in /etc/hosts; I'm not sure on that though). Obviously, host-to-ipaddress mapping is failing here because using a dotted ip address works (so the network itself is working). Michael J. Hammel | mjhammel@{Kepler|socrates}.dell.com Dell Computer Corp. | {73377.3467|76424.3024}@compuserve.com #include <disclaim/std> | zzham@ttuvm1.bitnet | uunet!uudell!feynman!mjhammel "oh oh, kwyjeebo on the loose!"