Odd networking issue

Save removing it for later...

When you set it to NAT, did you change it to DHCP, you'll have to do
that. It should allow you to reach everything outside the host, but
nothing will be able to get into the VM from outside.

If one VM works with NAT, this one should too...

Do you have some kind of 3rd party firewall in the VM?

--
Bob Comer



On Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:08:50 -0800, Karl E. Peterson <>
wrote:

>Karl E. Peterson explained on 12/3/2009 :
>> Robert Comer explained :
>>> You might try and just delete the connection and reboot to let it
>>> recreate it -- it might be corrupt.
>>
>> Okay, wth, not the first time that would've helped.
>
>Huh. Sucker won't let me delete it.

I get that VPCbus thing too, never figured out why.

--
Bob Comer


On Thu, 03 Dec 2009 12:59:15 -0800, Karl E. Peterson <>
wrote:

>Robert Comer explained :
>>> Well, when I set Adapter 1 to the NIC in the box, I'm back to where I
>>> started. (Probably because I disabled the other within the VM.) Host
>>> can ping guest and guest can ping host, but guest can't get beyond
>>> host.
>>
>> DHCP or a fixed address?
>
>Fixed.
>
>> Check your gateway address on both the host
>> and the guest to see if they are the same.
>
>Check.
>
>> Is this at home or work?
>
>Work. Though I'd like the VM to be portable. It is on a laptop. I'm
>on a wired connection at the moment.
>
>> Make sure the VM is in the same subnet as the other PC's too.
>
>Yep.
>
>> You might try and just delete the connection and reboot to let it
>> recreate it -- it might be corrupt.
>
>Okay, wth, not the first time that would've helped.
>
>There is also an Unknown Device I haven't figured out yet. Probably
>not related to the networking, but I think it may be VPC related as
>it's device ID is "ACPI\VPCBUS\4&4B01EB&0"

on 12/3/2009, Robert Comer supposed :
> Save removing it for later...

Check. <g>

> When you set it to NAT, did you change it to DHCP, you'll have to do
> that. It should allow you to reach everything outside the host, but
> nothing will be able to get into the VM from outside.

He shoots; he scores! Damn, I don't believe I missed that.

> If one VM works with NAT, this one should too...
>
> Do you have some kind of 3rd party firewall in the VM?

Nope. Seems to be working just fine, now. :-)

Well, with one little oddity. I can resolve the ip address for other
machines on the network, it seems. All but one. The host. What's up
with that?

--
[.NET: It's About Trust!]

Robert Comer wrote :
> I get that VPCbus thing too, never figured out why.

Weird, huh? So just disable the sucker and move on?

--
[.NET: It's About Trust!]

> He shoots; he scores! Damn, I don't believe I missed that.

I usually get caught by that one too since they changed the default to NAT. <g>

> Well, with one little oddity. I can resolve the ip address for other
> machines on the network, it seems. All but one. The host. What's up
> with that?

There is some weirdness between the host and guest, performance problems, and
that might be what's getting in the way. You might be able to just use the IP
Address, or put it in the lmhosts file.

--
Bob Comer




Karl E. Peterson wrote:
> on 12/3/2009, Robert Comer supposed :
>> Save removing it for later...
>
> Check. <g>
>
>> When you set it to NAT, did you change it to DHCP, you'll have to do
>> that. It should allow you to reach everything outside the host, but
>> nothing will be able to get into the VM from outside.
>
> He shoots; he scores! Damn, I don't believe I missed that.
>
>> If one VM works with NAT, this one should too...
>>
>> Do you have some kind of 3rd party firewall in the VM?
>
> Nope. Seems to be working just fine, now. :-)
>
> Well, with one little oddity. I can resolve the ip address for other
> machines on the network, it seems. All but one. The host. What's up
> with that?
>

I just leave it as is and haven't had a problem.

I'll do a little research on it now that you've piqued my interest in it again...

--
Bob Comer




Karl E. Peterson wrote:
> Robert Comer wrote :
>> I get that VPCbus thing too, never figured out why.
>
> Weird, huh? So just disable the sucker and move on?
>

Robert Comer expressed precisely :
> > He shoots; he scores! Damn, I don't believe I missed that.
>
> I usually get caught by that one too since they changed the default to NAT.
> <g>
>
> > Well, with one little oddity. I can resolve the ip address for other
> > machines on the network, it seems. All but one. The host. What's up
> > with that?
>
> There is some weirdness between the host and guest, performance problems, and
> that might be what's getting in the way. You might be able to just use the
> IP Address, or put it in the lmhosts file.

Any reason in particular for using lmhosts rather than hosts?

--
[.NET: It's About Trust!]

lmhosts works better for netbios.

--
Bob Comer




Karl E. Peterson wrote:
> Robert Comer expressed precisely :
>> > He shoots; he scores! Damn, I don't believe I missed that.
>>
>> I usually get caught by that one too since they changed the default to
>> NAT. <g>
>>
>> > Well, with one little oddity. I can resolve the ip address for other
>> > machines on the network, it seems. All but one. The host. What's up
>> > with that?
>>
>> There is some weirdness between the host and guest, performance
>> problems, and that might be what's getting in the way. You might be
>> able to just use the IP Address, or put it in the lmhosts file.
>
> Any reason in particular for using lmhosts rather than hosts?
>

Robert Comer was thinking very hard :
>> Any reason in particular for using lmhosts rather than hosts?
>
> lmhosts works better for netbios.

Huh. I'll have to play with that. Thanks...

--
[.NET: It's About Trust!]