Very Computer

I have a communications server that's been giving us fits for a few
months now.  I can't seem to locate the problem.  I've been searching
DejaNews for analogous problem, but it looks like it's either something
I'm doing wrong, or I can't find it from the keywords I'm using.

    The machine will call the ISP on startup and work just fine, using a
static IP, BTW.  After a few hours it simply gets 'clogged' and won't
ping in either direction anymore.  The machine is pinging a couple of
times a minute in order to defeat the idelout on the terminal server,
but despite the inability to ping, it still doesn't hang up.  This
usually happens after several hours of no non-ping activity, like
overnight.

    So we have a site that won't communicate and won't hang up either.
It's running 4.2 (for now) but in desperation, I intend to 'flush and
fill' 5.0 on it this weekend, though I'd rather not.

    It's too old a pppd to support "nomagic" and similar options...is
there anything that anyone has seen like this so far?

    Brian

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Fahrlander                       Problem Solver, Technomad, and
Linux-head
Evansville, IN
ICQ:5119262                                    
http://dy*.net/users/kilroy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Treason? "It's not wether it happened, but the seriousness of the
charge."
                                                         -- Right, Mr.
Gingrich?

|     The machine will call the ISP on startup and work just fine, using a
| static IP, BTW.  After a few hours it simply gets 'clogged' and won't
| ping in either direction anymore.  The machine is pinging a couple of
| times a minute in order to defeat the idelout on the terminal server,
| but despite the inability to ping, it still doesn't hang up.  This
| usually happens after several hours of no non-ping activity, like
| overnight.
|
|     So we have a site that won't communicate and won't hang up either.
| It's running 4.2 (for now) but in desperation, I intend to 'flush and
| fill' 5.0 on it this weekend, though I'd rather not.
|
|     It's too old a pppd to support "nomagic" and similar options...is
| there anything that anyone has seen like this so far?

You can use the lcmp-echo stuff to detect lack of response at the other
end. You can do a ping and tear down the connection if you get no
answer. You may have to upgrade you pppd and rebuild the kernel, I don't
think a total update would help much.

My thought is that this may very well be at the server end, but check
memory use with 'free' and see if something is leaking. Does your other
IP connectivity still work? Can you telnet to loopback? That will tell
you if the network stack is totally hosed.

--

"In elementary school, in case of fire you have to line up quietly in a
single file line from smallest to tallest. What is the logic? Do tall
people burn slower?"
                --Warren Hutcherson

Quote:> My thought is that this may very well be at the server end, but check
> memory use with 'free' and see if something is leaking. Does your other
> IP connectivity still work? Can you telnet to loopback? That will tell
> you if the network stack is totally hosed.

    The biggest reason for upgrading is that my home machine is calling
the same ISP, using the same terminal servers, both with a static IP.  I
had problems with it* similarly (but different) to the one we're
talking about.  I dread the upgrade (which from 4.2 to 5.0 is a
flush-and-fill) but it looks like my last hope, so that I can use that
'nomagic' which made my home system work so well.

    Brian

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Fahrlander                       Problem Solver, Technomad, and
Linux-head
Evansville, IN
ICQ:5119262                                    
http://dy*.net/users/kilroy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Treason? "It's not wether it happened, but the seriousness of the
charge."
                                                         -- Right, Mr.
Gingrich?