1,105,331 Community Members

One way ping problem

Member Avatar
hkarabay
Newbie Poster
2 posts since Jul 2003
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 0 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

I have 2 PC with Win98 2nd ed.

They connect to each other via ethernet cross cable.
I can file sharing, transfering etc via NetBEUI protocol between 2 PC.

When I load TCP/IP to both PC and use the
ip 10.1.1.10 and subnet mast 255.255.255.0 for PC1
and
ip 10.1.1.20 and subnet mast 255.255.255.0 for PC2

I can ping 10.1.1.20 and ping 10.1.1.10 from PC1, and

ping 10.1.1.20 from PC2 but I can not ping 10.1.1.10 from PC2.

Any idea for this situation?

Member Avatar
PantherAHA
Newbie Poster
12 posts since Jul 2003
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 1 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

Ping is the lowest layer protocal, if you can transfer files from PC2 to PC1 then you can also ping from PC2 to PC1, File transfer is FTP, and the same layer as ping. A machine being able to ping itself is irrelevant as it uses a built in self test IP 127.0.0.1 (local loop back) to do this.

If indeed you cannot transfer files from PC2 to PC1 then you have a bad crosscable. Try this.....

at a command prompt "DOS prompt" type "route print", this will give you all active routes, IP's, and subnets, including the local loop back you use when a machine pings itself. I doubt there will be any problems, but it will give you a wealth of information to work with.

Member Avatar
hkarabay
Newbie Poster
2 posts since Jul 2003
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 0 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

Thanks for your reply.

As I mentioned before, in NetBEUI (MS Windows protocol) I can file transfer on both side PC's.

In TCP/IP I can not ping only from one PC to other. A > B OK B > A not OK.

I can ping from A (100.10.10.10) to B (100.10.10.20)
I can not ping from B (100.10.10.20) to A (100.10.10.10)

I checked the cross cable again. IT is OK.

Here is the route prints sum of both PC. As you see at last line there is a difference.
Can you give me any other idea? Thank you.

100.10.10.20 (B)
------------

Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Interface Metric
100.10.10.0 255.255.255.0 100.10.10.20 100.10.10.20 1
100.10.10.20 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1
100.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 100.10.10.20 100.10.10.20 1
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1
224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 100.10.10.20 100.10.10.20 1
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 100.10.10.20 100.10.10.20 1

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

100.10.10.10 (A)
------------

Network Address Netmask Gateway Address Interface Metric
100.10.10.0 255.255.255.0 100.10.10.10 100.10.10.10 1
100.10.10.10 255.255.255.255 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1
100.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 100.10.10.10 100.10.10.10 1
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 1
224.0.0.0 224.0.0.0 100.10.10.10 100.10.10.10 1
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 100.10.10.10 0.0.0.0 1

Member Avatar
ch1772
Newbie Poster
3 posts since Jul 2003
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 0 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

Ping is the lowest layer protocal, if you can transfer files from PC2 to PC1 then you can also ping from PC2 to PC1, File transfer is FTP, and the same layer as ping. A machine being able to ping itself is irrelevant as it uses a built in self test IP 127.0.0.1 (local loop back) to do this.

If indeed you cannot transfer files from PC2 to PC1 then you have a bad crosscable. Try this.....

at a command prompt "DOS prompt" type "route print", this will give you all active routes, IP's, and subnets, including the local loop back you use when a machine pings itself. I doubt there will be any problems, but it will give you a wealth of information to work with.

:shock:

2 things wrong with your statement.
1. Ping is not a protocol but a network application utilizing IP at OSI layer 3.
2. There is no such thing as a "lowest layer protocol" What about layer 2 protocols? Frame Relay, ATM, PPP none of which ranks higher than the other
2.1. Is Sprint Hiring? I want your job.

Member Avatar
tlakers
Newbie Poster
6 posts since Jul 2003
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 0 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

Greetings,
One thing that was not mentioned was is there a Gateway in the TCP/IP properties for PC1 and PC2. If this setting is incorrect on one of the PC's the ping reply will not "know" how to get back to PC2. They should be the same on both PC's.

Member Avatar
aeinstein
Team Member - aka kaynine
643 posts since May 2002
Reputation Points: 79 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 8 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
Team Colleague
 
0
 

do your ip's actually start with 100. or is that a typo? does PC1 have a firewall that disallow ICMP?

Member Avatar
Z28James
Light Poster
46 posts since Feb 2003
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 1 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

:shock:

2 things wrong with your statement.
1. Ping is not a protocol but a network application utilizing IP at OSI layer 3.
2. There is no such thing as a "lowest layer protocol" What about layer 2 protocols? Frame Relay, ATM, PPP none of which ranks higher than the other
2.1. Is Sprint Hiring? I want your job.

Your trolling sure did help solve this guys problems, good show.

Member Avatar
freebie
Newbie Poster
10 posts since Aug 2003
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 0 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

Greetings,
One thing that was not mentioned was is there a Gateway in the TCP/IP properties for PC1 and PC2. If this setting is incorrect on one of the PC's the ping reply will not "know" how to get back to PC2. They should be the same on both PC's.

gateway is not necessary if both PCs are on the same subnet.
Gateway AKA router.

Member Avatar
shefit
Newbie Poster
4 posts since Aug 2003
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 0 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

I have almost exactly the same problem. Two machines, A and B, connected via crossover cable between two 100 mbps ethernet cards.

Machine A: Windows XP with internet connection sharing running on a cable modem. XP standard firewall is on. No problems accessing internet at all. Provides IP address to machine B via DHCP. Also has IPX installed, and Microsoft file sharing runs over that and that only (not TCP/IP).

Machine B: Windows 98, takes IP address from A via DHCP. Uses IPX for file sharing. No problems accessing internet at all.

The file sharing works perfectly, so two-way communication is fine with IPX. Internet connection is fine from both A and B (via A), so two-way communication is also fine in that respect.

BUT this this the problem: machine B (98) can ping machine A (XP) but not vice-versa. Any attempt, in fact, to initiate a connection over TCP/IP to B from A will fail, which is why I set file sharing over IPX.

Tried static IP addresses, turning off QoS, turning off firewalls, etc. but to no avail. Also tried uninstalling and reinstalling network hardware and software but no differences observed.

I am almost certain that the problem lies with B (98) because this problem also occurs on other networks where NAT is in use. Internet OK, but specific TCP/IP connections to the machine fail.

The weird thing is that two-way intra-network TCP/IP connections the other way (to the XP machine) are also fine!!!

Member Avatar
aeinstein
Team Member - aka kaynine
643 posts since May 2002
Reputation Points: 79 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 8 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
Team Colleague
 
0
 

1) get a real firewall, even if it's a www freebie & disable the XP firewall cause its truly useless
2) are you using IPX on the Win98 (sys B) because you cant ICS or because you simply cant ping?

Member Avatar
shefit
Newbie Poster
4 posts since Aug 2003
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 0 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

1) get a real firewall, even if it's a www freebie & disable the XP firewall cause its truly useless
2) are you using IPX on the Win98 (sys B) because you cant ICS or because you simply cant ping?

There is no firewall on (what I believe to be) the offending W98 machine and there never has been, so the problem must lie with something else. It certainly acts like it *is* firewalled though, as it will not under any circumstances reply to a ping or connection request from anywhere else.

I switched on IPX to make file sharing work. ICS works fine because the W98 machine is the originator in that case.

It really is as if there is a firewall enabled when there isn't!

Member Avatar
aeinstein
Team Member - aka kaynine
643 posts since May 2002
Reputation Points: 79 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 8 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
Team Colleague
 
0
 

the firewall comment was specifically for the WinXP sys, not the Win98 sys. on the Win98 sys, without ipx bindings but with tcp/ip bound to the nic do winipcfg & notate your default gateway. with that do the following:

1) ping 127.0.0.1 - essentially useless for determing whether or not u have a connection, but if it fails either your nic, slot, drivers or OS is hosed;
2) whoops, was gonna have you ping your default gateway, but youre actually P2P & not really on a LAN... hmmm, skip getting the default gateway, but stilll ping as per 1) above. if that's ok then do the following:

1) if at all possible locate appropriate Win98 CD (you don't absolutely have to have it, but there's an ever so slight chance that if you dont have it Win98 wont find the files it needs in the cabs)
2) right click the Network Places icon, left click properties, remove *ALL* bindings, click ok (if u get sys msg stating network not complete click yes to continue) & then No to restart;
3)access network props as in step 2); select your nic, click add, dbl click protocol, on left select Microsoft, then after that on right window pane select tcp/ip (may need to scroll to bottom), click ok, click ok again down & bottom of dialog box, & say yes to restart;
4) thats right, dont rebuild ICS until after u resolve tcp/ip issues;
5) on boot up recheck tcp/ip configs to ensure you have what you want;


if all's well go ahead & rebuild ICS bindings otherwise post probs.

personally i'd set statics on both pcs' if your using ICS through a dial-up - which begs the question, if your not on a dialup ur on a cable/dsl modem & if so, do symptoms persist if u connect Win98 directly to cable/dsl modem?

btw, naturally i dont know the stability of ur sys, nor, with all due respect, ur technical prowse, so obviously this advice is to be taken under consideration and implemented at your own risk - and that of your pc's.

Member Avatar
shefit
Newbie Poster
4 posts since Aug 2003
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 0 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

I stumbled across the solution by chance. A previous installation of Zonealarm had not been completely removed and was still exercising some power over my network, but not in any configurable way. Hence ICMP and TCP requests were blocked, as they were not solicited by the Win 98 machine.

Here is how to remove it:

http://www.zonelabs.com/store/content/support/znalmInstall98FAQ.jsp

Perhaps the original poster's problem is related?

Member Avatar
jjun82
Newbie Poster
4 posts since Nov 2003
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 0 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

this is more like 2 way ping problem..

recently i bought a wireless network card so i can connect my notebook and desktop together P2P.

I used static IP addressing cos i dont really need ICS on my notebook.

Desktop IP: 192.168.100.1
Notebook IP: 192.168.100.2
Subnet: 255.255.255.0

Workgroup name is same on both comps.

My firewall software has been turned off on my desktop and i havent installed anything on my notebook.

Now on my desktop Im able to see the notebook in network places but not on my notebook.

When I try to ping each other i just get a request timeout.
ping Notebook 2 desktop = request timeout
ping desktop 2 notebook = request timeout

My notebook is running win XP Pro and my desktop is win 2000 Pro..

Ive tried uninstalling networking on my notebook but still not working..

But im pretty sure its my notebook problem because networking doesnt even work on an ethernet LAN as well as Wireless

Member Avatar
swiep
Newbie Poster
2 posts since Nov 2003
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 0 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

I'm having a similar problem with win2k3 and linux.

i can connect from various other systems to the linux, including one that uses win2k3 also.

I know for sure my tcp/ip (static ip, gateway,dns) settings are filled in correctly.
Cable is ok and there are 2 onboard NIC's, both don't work so i guess it;s software.

I was on the internet with it, so it worked fine untill i restarted after having installed and removed a few things.

I think i have installed something that blocks or i have removed something that allows incoming pings.

Any suggestions on what could block or is there a tool to see if it's getting blocked?

Any suggestion on how to solve this is appreciated.

Member Avatar
aeinstein
Team Member - aka kaynine
643 posts since May 2002
Reputation Points: 79 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 8 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
Team Colleague
 
0
 

jjunn82 states: "Now on my desktop Im able to see the notebook in network places but not on my notebook."

do you mean that you can see the notebook in network places, but that you cannot see it in Windows Explorer?


jjun82 states: "But im pretty sure its my notebook problem because networking doesnt even work on an ethernet LAN as well as Wireless"

please clarify this is i have no idea (well, barely an idea) of what your trying to say.

to get a better idea of what's happening get to a "DOS Prompt"/console window, type in "ipconfig/all" & hit enter and post back everything that you get for both machines.

Member Avatar
aeinstein
Team Member - aka kaynine
643 posts since May 2002
Reputation Points: 79 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 8 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
Team Colleague
 
0
 

swiep: post if you havent gotten this resolved

Member Avatar
mikestrat6
Newbie Poster
7 posts since Feb 2004
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 0 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

I had a similar problem and it turned out my computers were detecting a nearby access point that i was not using. My desktop is connected directly to the internet and shares the connection over a wireless usb adapter. My laptop connects to the desktop ad/hoc. Make sure you select the correct wireless network to be used for the connection (In my case the ad/hoc network) by disabling any access points that you don't want to use. Hope this helps....

Member Avatar
specsol
Newbie Poster
3 posts since Mar 2004
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 0 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

I have similar problem, connecting 2 Windows98 SE machines with crossover cable. No attempt to internet access, just to share files. Works fine with NETBEUI. Won't with TCP/IP. Both machines have clean install of Windows, no firewall (never was). Neither machine can ping the other, but can ping its own address. One machine can see the network members, the other can see nothing. But which machine sees the network and which does not varies depending on which machine last had a setting changed. Both machines have static IP addresses:- 192.168.0.1 and 192.168.0.2 (submask 255.255.2355.0).Both machines in same workgroup and have different names. The machine which sees nothing brings up the message "Unable to browse network, network is not accessible". The Microsoft Knowledge Base article 193938 which specifically refers to this message does not apply to my situation (tried all their steps). The machine which sees the network member gives message \\(computer name) is not accessible. Pings just time out. Settings on both machines identical except for IP address and computer names and check out with everything I have read.

Can the cable work OK for NETBEUI and not work for TCP/IP?

Member Avatar
specsol
Newbie Poster
3 posts since Mar 2004
Reputation Points: 0 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 0 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 0 [?]
 
0
 

Sorry, typo in my previous post -- subnet is (of course) 255.255.255.0

You
This article has been dead for over three months: Start a new discussion instead
Post:
Start New Discussion
Tags Related to this Article