On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 10:05 AM, David Sommerseth <dazo at users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > On 10/01/11 05:41, Rudi Ahlers wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 11:13 PM, Robert Spangler >> <mlists at zoominternet.net> wrote: >>> On Sunday 09 January 2011 13:33, Rudi Ahlers wrote: >>> >>>> Our intranet's WAN interface just stopped working yesterday, and I >>>> can't figure it out. >>> >>> Look in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts. There you should see ifcfg-eth# If >>> ifcfg-eth0 isn't there copy ifcfg-eth1 to ifccfg-eth0 and then configure >>> ifcfg-eth0 to the information needed for your WAN link. >>> >> >> The device file exists, but it's like asif the network card itself >> doesn't exist. > > My immediate hunch is ... and I'm sorry to say it ... but your NIC is > often referred to as Realcrap NICs - unfortunately that's not without a > reason. Thank you for the discrimination, but it's not appreciated. This is not a multi-million dollar enterprise cluster, so please don't see it as such. It's an in-house development server and really doesn't justify thousands of dollars' worth of hardware. The NIC was working fine for about 2 years now without a hiccup, out of the box when we first installed CentOS. Something went wrong, I just don't know how to actually fix it without re-installing CentOS :) > > However, check what lspci says. If you don't see your NIC there, it is > most likely a hardware issue (or caused by BIOS changes). If you see > it, then look closely in dmesg for anything related to loading the > kernel module for this NIC. See if that spits out any error messages. > You may also try to reload your NICs kernel module (modprobe -r <module> > && modprobe <module>). > > Another thing is to figure out what you did before it stopped working. > If you want to say "I did nothing" and that means you rebooted your box, > upgraded packages or other things which might sound safe and innocent, > it might just as well be connected. The kernel & CentOS itself was upgraded last year sometime, when CentOS 5.5. was released and it was running fine since then. I really did nothing. We were working on a client's stuff, in fact, accessing data over SMB from the server. Would that have caused an issue? The network just dropped and hooked a KVM onto it to see what's up. eth0 was still using IP 192.168.1.250 (configured when we installed it) I then restarted the network scripts (/etc/init.d/network restart) and eth0 didn't come back up. So, it could either be a faulty network (yes, expensive card can also fail) or the driver doesn't load properly anymore. BUT, I don't know where to start fixing the problem. > > The only times I've experienced issues and where I really did nothing, > it was related to physical hardware issues. But those times where I did > "nothing" (rebooting, upgrading, innocent configuration changes) and got > troubles ... it was always connected to that I did the "nothing" thing. > Sometimes even disabling "useless features" in BIOS turned out to > disable quite a useful feature after all. So are you saying a spook accessed the BIOS of a machine which was running for about 3 years, without any hardware changes? I don't, ever, change BIOS settings once a machine is setup. Why should I? Besides, the machine doesn't have a monitor or keyboard and I need to take the one off my desk, walk over to the server room plug it in and then access it that way. I don't know about you, but I don't do this randomly every day, it's a waste of time. > > So no rock is too small to be turned around now. Go carefully through > all your changes you did before it stopped working. > > > kind regards, > > David Sommerseth > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > -- Kind Regards Rudi Ahlers SoftDux Website: http://www.SoftDux.com Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com Office: 087 805 9573 Cell: 082 554 7532