eth0:0 is configured but not listed in ifconfig output

6,920

eth0 and eth0:0 are the same interface. Use eth0:1 for an alias.

Could it be that DEVICE=eth0 should actually be DEVICE=eth0:0?

Share:
6,920

Related videos on Youtube

Vladislav Rastrusny
Author by

Vladislav Rastrusny

Updated on September 17, 2022

Comments

  • Vladislav Rastrusny
    Vladislav Rastrusny almost 2 years

    I have the following problem:

    My server was given two IPs from [b]different[/b] subnets. Now I am trying to configure the system to work properly. I have created

    [root@server ~]# cat /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0
    # Intel Corporation 80003ES2LAN Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Copper)
    HWADDR=00:30:48:DA:B1:0E
    DEVICE=eth0
    BOOTPROTO=none
    BROADCAST=79.174.69.255
    IPADDR=79.174.69.241
    NETMASK=255.255.254.0
    NETWORK=79.174.68.0
    ONBOOT=yes
    GATEWAY=79.174.68.1
    TYPE=Ethernet
    
    [root@server ~]# cat /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0:0
    # Intel Corporation 80003ES2LAN Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Copper)
    HWADDR=00:30:48:DA:B1:0E
    DEVICE=eth0
    BOOTPROTO=none
    BROADCAST=79.174.69.255
    IPADDR=79.174.71.74
    NETMASK=255.255.255.0
    NETWORK=79.174.71.1
    ONBOOT=yes
    GATEWAY=79.174.71.1
    TYPE=Ethernet
    

    But both after "service network restart" and after "reboot"

    [root@server ~]# ifconfig
    eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:30:48:DA:B1:0E
              inet addr:79.174.71.74  Bcast:79.174.71.255  Mask:255.255.255.0
              inet6 addr: fe80::230:48ff:feda:b10e/64 Scope:Link
              UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
              RX packets:910284 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
              TX packets:2924 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
              collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
              RX bytes:257964879 (246.0 MiB)  TX bytes:232450 (227.0 KiB)
              Memory:df220000-df240000
    
    lo        Link encap:Local Loopback
              inet addr:127.0.0.1  Mask:255.0.0.0
              inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
              UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:16436  Metric:1
              RX packets:27 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
              TX packets:27 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
              collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
              RX bytes:6976 (6.8 KiB)  TX bytes:6976 (6.8 KiB)
    

    Device eth0:0 is not shown as active. If I try

    [root@server ~]# ifconfig eth0:0
    eth0:0    Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:30:48:DA:B1:0E
              UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
              Memory:df220000-df240000
    

    It is shown as up and running, but IP is not assigned to it.

    Also it is strange, that IP address assigned to eth0:0 in config file is used by eth0.

    /var/log/messages shows nothing about network configuration errors on either eth0 or eth0:0. system-config-network seem to understand all settings correctly and resaves them ok also.

    "ifup eth0:0" executes ok, but ifconfig afterwards shows no eth0:0 device after that.

    What did I do wrong? May be the problem is that IPs are from different subnets?

  • rkthkr
    rkthkr about 14 years
    Well spotted :)
  • Vladislav Rastrusny
    Vladislav Rastrusny about 14 years
    That is not correct: kbase.redhat.com/faq/docs/DOC-6133 | centos.org/docs/5/html/Deployment_Guide-en-US/… | faqs.org/docs/Linux-mini/IP-Alias.html eth0:0 is a correct alias. My second CentOS server is using it and works ok.
  • Dan Andreatta
    Dan Andreatta about 14 years
    @FractalizeR: I remember I stopped eth0:0 by mistake once and it brought down the whole interface, but it was on Ubuntu. Or I remember wrong. Anyway, I have edited the post with a different attempt.
  • Vladislav Rastrusny
    Vladislav Rastrusny about 14 years
    Yes, I've just spotted that it should be DEVICE=eth0:0! The problem arose when I misconfigured IPs on network card and asked hoster to correct this problem and to bring up second IP on virtual adapter. My god..
  • Dan Andreatta
    Dan Andreatta about 14 years
    @FractalizeR: Don't be so hard on yourself. I had to drive to the colo place because a server would not come up for a similar misconfiguration... and Ubuntu will fail all interfaces if one is misconfigured...