arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network
derek at computinginnovations.com
Wed May 14 18:19:19 UTC 2008
At 06:22 AM 5/14/2008, Christer Solskogen wrote:
>Derek Ragona wrote:
>>Yes aliases should have a netmask of 255.255.255.255
>Still no go.
>192.168.0.255 is showing up in "arp -a" and netstat -rn. (and the
>"arplookup 0.0.0.0 failed: host is not on local network" in /var/log/messages)
>nfe0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
> ether 00:18:f3:29:d8:15
> inet 192.168.0.3 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.0.255
> inet 192.168.0.4 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 192.168.0.4
> inet 192.168.0.5 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 192.168.0.5
> media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseTX <full-duplex,flag0,flag1>)
> status: active
>Anything else that might explain this kind of behavior?
I would do a traceroute from all your hosts there. When you do keep an eye
out for the arp error message. This should help find the host causing
these errors and then look at that systems configuration.
Also do you have more than one ethernet interface in the system showing the
arp errors? If you do, make sure the interfaces are on different subnets.
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
More information about the freebsd-questions