JEmplode "ethernet broadcase" discovery protocol bug? | Technical / Troubleshooting | unofficial empeg BBS

Quick Links: Empeg FAQ | RioCar.Org | Hijack | BigDisk Builder | jEmplode | emphatic
Repairs: Repairs

You are not logged in. [Log In] empegbbs.com » Forums » empeg-car » Technical / Troubleshooting » JEmplode "ethernet broadcase" discovery protocol bug?

Page 2 of 2

2

Topic Options

#288971 - 03/11/2006 15:19 Re: JEmplode "ethernet broadcast" discovery protocol bug? [Re: mlord]
wfaulk carpal tunnel Registered: 25/12/2000 Posts: 16706 Loc: Raleigh, NC US	Quote: Ahh.. bingo. Something is causing it to parse /etc/hosts to try and find the local ip address. Why does it do such a silly thing? Dunno, but it does. Again, because Java doesn't have hooks low enough in the IP stack to get it to return quality IP addressing information. _________________________ Bitt Faulk
Top

#288972 - 03/11/2006 15:22 Re: JEmplode "ethernet broadcast" discovery protocol bug? [Re: mlord]
wfaulk carpal tunnel Registered: 25/12/2000 Posts: 16706 Loc: Raleigh, NC US	Quote: Ahh.. waitaminute.. there was a loopback entry in /etc/hosts for the local hostname.. delete that line completely and it also now works. Speaking of which: You probably have a decent amount of pull in the Linux community. Can you tell everybody that this default of having the local hostname in /etc/hosts as 127.0.0.1 is complete brokenness, please? I know it's not a Linux issue, but virtually every distribution does it and it's 100% wrong. It causes a lot of problems like this. _________________________ Bitt Faulk
Top

#288973 - 03/11/2006 16:04 Re: JEmplode "ethernet broadcast" discovery protocol bug? [Re: mlord]
peter carpal tunnel Registered: 13/07/2000 Posts: 4180 Loc: Cambridge, England	Quote: It all makes sense now in the edited post above. The 255.255.255.255 address is the only one that is actually working here, because of my 7-bit subnet. Except that that doesn't make sense -- because it was sending to 255.255.255.255 even before you changed /etc/hosts...? Peter
Top

#288974 - 03/11/2006 16:09 Re: JEmplode "ethernet broadcast" discovery protocol bug? [Re: peter]
mlord carpal tunnel Registered: 29/08/2000 Posts: 14491 Loc: Canada	Quote: Quote: It all makes sense now in the edited post above. The 255.255.255.255 address is the only one that is actually working here, because of my 7-bit subnet. Except that that doesn't make sense -- because it was sending to 255.255.255.255 even before you changed /etc/hosts...? Peter Yeah, but then I'll bet it was using 127.* as the reply address..
Top

#288975 - 03/11/2006 16:13 Re: JEmplode "ethernet broadcast" discovery protocol bug? [Re: mlord]
peter carpal tunnel Registered: 13/07/2000 Posts: 4180 Loc: Cambridge, England	Quote: Yeah, but then I'll bet it was using 127.* as the reply address.. Packets with 127.0.0.1 as the src_ip? Oooh, by binding the local UDP socket to it? Is that even allowed? If so then I guess that would explain why Wireshark didn't see the packet -- if you had it set up to filter on src_ip=<the.correct.address>... Peter
Top

Page 2 of 2

2

View All Topics