Discussion:
NIC change question
(too old to reply)
Mike Luther
2011-01-15 20:00:49 UTC
Permalink
I have a very old OS/2 unit that has an old 10K/COAX NIC card in it that I'd
like to move upward to a 'normal' PCI 100K NIC network card. Many of the
systems with which I work are hard defined LAN address groups. Not this group
of boxes. It's DHCP addressing based on, in this case, a ZyXel router.

From foggy mountain old memory, I think I changing the NIC, as long as I
don't change the TCP/IP and NETBIOS names on a particular unit, will still be
assigned the same DHCP local address by the router.

Right? Or wrong? Thanks!
--
--> Sleep well; OS2's still awake! ;)

Mike Luther
Trevor Hemsley
2011-01-15 20:04:50 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 20:00:49 UTC in comp.os.os2.networking.misc, Mike Luther
Post by Mike Luther
From foggy mountain old memory, I think I changing the NIC, as long as I
don't change the TCP/IP and NETBIOS names on a particular unit, will still be
assigned the same DHCP local address by the router.
Right? Or wrong? Thanks!
Wrong. DHCP servers hand out addresses based on MAC addresses and if you replace
the network card, you change the MAC address which means that it will almost
certainly be given a different IP address when it requests one. If your DHCP
server has the ability to hard code a MAC address to IP address then you can
probably override this after changing the network card by using the server GUI.
--
Trevor Hemsley, Brighton, UK
Trevor dot Hemsley at ntlworld dot com
Mike Luther
2011-01-15 23:14:50 UTC
Permalink
Thanks Trevor
Post by Trevor Hemsley
Wrong. DHCP servers hand out addresses based on MAC addresses and if you replace
the network card, you change the MAC address which means that it will almost
certainly be given a different IP address when it requests one. If your DHCP
server has the ability to hard code a MAC address to IP address then you can
probably override this after changing the network card by using the server GUI.
That's what I was afraid of, scowl. OK, if I recall a bit more, could I
'force' my 'current' NIC address for the old card in the PEERLAN workstation
card info slot in the setup selection for the new NIC card and cheat my way
through this? If I recall things, there is an info slot called the Network
Adapter Address in the NETBIOS for OS/2 protocol choice settings screen. I've
never used this before. Would that 'solve' my problem?


Thanks!
--
--> Sleep well; OS2's still awake! ;)

Mike Luther
Mike Luther
2011-01-16 01:13:24 UTC
Permalink
Thanks Trevor
Post by Trevor Hemsley
Wrong. DHCP servers hand out addresses based on MAC addresses and if you replace
the network card, you change the MAC address which means that it will almost
certainly be given a different IP address when it requests one. If your DHCP
server has the ability to hard code a MAC address to IP address then you can
probably override this after changing the network card by using the server GUI.
OK, however, can I maybe solve this problem by going in to the NEBIOS - OS/2
setup form in the new NIC MAC choice, and 'force' things my way by manually
using the ID definition at the top of the chart? By setting it to the MAC
address of the old MAC? That ID always shows up in the LANTRAN.LOG file and
matches the tag number that is printed on a tag on all the MAC plug-in cards I
have here. It also shows up time and again if you for all the re-issue DCHP
data if you have DHCP logging enabled matched to the same string data for the
same NIC card, even though you are using DCHP.

Thoughts?

--


--> Sleep well; OS2's still awake! ;)

Mike Luther
Trevor Hemsley
2011-01-16 12:49:39 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 01:13:24 UTC in comp.os.os2.networking.misc, Mike Luther
Post by Mike Luther
can I maybe solve this problem by going in to the NEBIOS - OS/2
setup form in the new NIC MAC choice, and 'force' things my way by manually
using the ID definition at the top of the chart? By setting it to the MAC
address of the old MAC?
That depends on the driver. If it implements that then it'll work and if it
doesn't then it won't. It's a bit of a bodge that's likely to come back and bite
you later so to be avoided if at all possible.
--
Trevor Hemsley, Brighton, UK
Trevor dot Hemsley at ntlworld dot com
Mike Luther
2011-01-16 13:42:43 UTC
Permalink
Hi again Trevor
Post by Trevor Hemsley
On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 01:13:24 UTC in comp.os.os2.networking.misc, Mike Luther
Post by Mike Luther
can I maybe solve this problem by going in to the NEBIOS - OS/2
setup form in the new NIC MAC choice, and 'force' things my way by manually
using the ID definition at the top of the chart? By setting it to the MAC
address of the old MAC?
That depends on the driver. If it implements that then it'll work and if it
doesn't then it won't. It's a bit of a bodge that's likely to come back and bite
you later so to be avoided if at all possible.
Thanks for the supporting comment. Matches my thoughts. Think I'll do some
experimentation on this with a surplus duplicate system, which is kind of
where I'm going anyway on this 'bodge'. There is a very clear reason why I'd
like to be able to do this, but wanted external thinking before I went down
this thundercloud pig trail. Chuckle...
--
--> Sleep well; OS2's still awake! ;)

Mike Luther
Paul Ratcliffe
2011-01-16 02:21:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Luther
I have a very old OS/2 unit that has an old 10K/COAX NIC card in it that I'd
like to move upward to a 'normal' PCI 100K NIC network card.
Er, 10M and 100M.
Post by Mike Luther
Many of the systems with which I work are hard defined LAN address groups.
Whatever that means i.e. nothing to any sane person.
Post by Mike Luther
Not this group of boxes.
So why mention it then?
Post by Mike Luther
It's DHCP addressing based on, in this case, a ZyXel router.
Who cares what the router is?
Post by Mike Luther
From foggy mountain old memory, I think I changing the NIC, as long as I
don't change the TCP/IP and NETBIOS names on a particular unit, will still be
assigned the same DHCP local address by the router.
Right? Or wrong? Thanks!
Wrong. It's obvious if you think about it. The only thing it *can* use is
a MAC address.

Why do you care what the IP address is anyway? If you do, then you
should be using a static address. If you are using DHCP, then by definition
you don't care. But then you're a bit odd anyway...

<shakes head and wonders why he bothers to reply>
Mike Luther
2011-01-16 16:08:01 UTC
Permalink
Hi Paul!
Post by Paul Ratcliffe
Why do you care what the IP address is anyway? If you do, then you
should be using a static address. If you are using DHCP, then by definition
you don't care. But then you're a bit odd anyway...
<shakes head and wonders why he bothers to reply>
Oh I make letter errors lots of times K/M, especially as an old guy who grew
up thinking certain cycles were lots of fun until modern day politicos taught
they hertz.. grin!

Odd? YES! but not gay about things, chuckle. I for one do not think Angels
play on a HAARP. As a NARTE Master Telecommunications Engineer since 1985, I
realize there is a *LOT* I don't know about things, but need to learn. Even
today; now.

As things get faster and faster and even just a couple months ago if you
really care to dig into the NASA data and other places, you'll find we were
about at a one-in-five chance of a level F5 Solar Flare. About as big as the
Carrington Event. And, yes, I really do hold one of the very few USA First
Class Radiotelegraph Commercial licenses ever issued in the USA. Could have
signed for the Titanic, but glad I wasn't there and ordered to send the
distress code by the boss. And sent CQD intead of the newly agreed upon SOS in
Morse Code.

And with my airplane having been hit six times directly by lightning as a very
high time commercial pilot, plus my ship over a dozen times directly, plus
twice having it hit a phone pole on a public street I couldn't get off of in a
questionable tornado, plus having it hit my car and blowing out the left front
tire, plus taking about an average two direct strikes on my rural ham radio
telegraph HF antenna farm a year for about thirty years now, one that even
rolled me out of bed that morning with a strange taste in my mouth ..

I realize that the networking masters are absolutely acting VERY risky to tell
us all we have to be talking to Master Government in REAL-TIME just to do
medical treatments, handle drugs, orchestrate power grids ..etc,, etc..

Let alone assign this to CLOUD technology, shall we say just a string that can
be tweaked by a HAARP , a single two hundred mike up nuke or substitute, or
even just our wonderful sun? On the way to the next 'peak' in Cycle 24 of the
sunspot cycle? With sunspots that have reverse polarity from cycle to cycle
every 11-13 years or so? Which is how we identify passage from one to the
next. And seem to be on the course to peak at the 'normal' about two years
after a new cycle starts. At about the last quarter of 2012. When we, the
sun and our solar system can reasonably be expected to pass through the center
of the galaxy magnetic polarity, which can maybe do what to the Earth?

Words have funny similarities. Magnetic and magma, for example. How many
degrees has the North Pole shifted just in a few years now that is so far off
even now that the direction identity runway markings for Florida airport
runways aren't even correct at 18/36 or whatever?

Paul .. I believe that the *ONLY* way we folks here in our computer world can
continue to tale care of those we love and respect, in the future, is to put
together complete EMP pulse and fully LOCALLY continuable operating LAN
systems which *CAN* and *DO* work in the event of either a tragic human caused
attempt what I believe is to wrongfully control others, or may easily be just
another facet of nature.

Remember the Carrington Event burned up most all of the telegraph sounders in
the whole USA that two years after the Golden Spike was driven mid-1800's
here. As well as sent many telegraph operators into confusion from strong
electrical shock. Plus actually, in a number of places, set the wood railroad
cross-ties on fire when the rails arced over them to the ground as the flare
hit the rails.

Sure .. I respect cloud movement for data. But absolutely only as backup
real-time LAN storage capability that, as long as things are working with the
cloud, are OK. That said, at the same time we *MUST* have totally local LAN
operations which can handle even manually auto-merged LOCALLY controlled LAN
administration. Even in an instant when the 'cloud' is gone. From completely
independent hardware clones that can be moved anywhere on demand in an
instant. Even if the LAN is just in an adjacent room at a local mission
critical site. Where maybe some rooms survived for use as to whatever
destroyed the copper wire connectivity of everything, but others in even the
same building did not. On different LAN's.

Remember that even a lightning strike is *NOT* electricity as such. It is
more or less a radio wave! Which doesn't even travel inside the conductor, be
it copper wire, a steel rail, the wires in the building. And reverses in
maximum voltage vs. maximum current every quarter wavelength along its path
down whatever; wherever? Ever seen a lightning ball? Grin!

I am researching how to do this LAN survival game in OS/2, as well as the
ability to carry forth with data from even absolutely necessary 1980's level
code .. to a decade or more in the future. Transparently, so as to help my
fellow man survive as best as possible.

As we go forward living in interesting times.

And *YES*, I do respect and appreciate everything you are doing for us all and
how you look at things, my friend! But what I am thinking about, working
about and asking about may not be what a lot of folks might think is normal.
And sure, it may be absolutely useless! But maybe not? Maybe your comment is
totally valid!

Grin!
--
--> Sleep well; OS2's still awake! ;)

Mike Luther
Paul Ratcliffe
2011-01-17 20:06:40 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 16:08:01 +0000, Mike Luther <***@ziplog.com>
wrote enough to prove to most people that he is completely barking mad.
Loading...