Bug 157319 - ifconfig computes wrong default broadcast address
ifconfig computes wrong default broadcast address
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3
Classification: Red Hat
Component: net-tools (Show other bugs)
3.0
i686 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Radek Vokal
Ben Levenson
:
Depends On:
Blocks: 156320
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2005-05-10 12:17 EDT by Marc Beauregard
Modified: 2007-11-30 17:07 EST (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version: RHBA-2005-700
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-09-28 14:35:54 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Marc Beauregard 2005-05-10 12:17:46 EDT
When setting up my second NIC on my server (IBM xSeries 345, Intel e1000 
network chipset), if I let ifconfig calculate the broadcast address, I get a 
broadcast address that's bigger than what my netmask specifies.
I typed:
ifconfig eth1 netmask 255.255.255.0 10.4.172.229
and I ended up with:
eth1      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:0D:60:EC:7D:55
          inet addr:10.4.172.229  Bcast:10.255.255.255  Mask:255.255.255.0

Note that once I've set the eth1's broadcast address to a proper values,
things are working out fine.
It's the initial setup, after I've installed the OS but I only have the first 
NIC enabled and I enable eth1 after the server has been fully installed with 
the OS and configured properly.
Comment 1 Marc Beauregard 2005-05-10 12:18:20 EDT
This is on Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS release 3 (Taroon Update 4)
with kernel 2.4.21-27.0.2.ELsmp (kernel-smp)
Comment 8 Red Hat Bugzilla 2005-09-28 14:35:54 EDT
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on the solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2005-700.html

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.