On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Gary Stainburn <gary.stainburn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If you say ip_forward is enabled then either there is a routing problem
or some firewall issue.
On Saturday 24 January 2009 10:06:01 Giany wrote:The routing isn't the problem.
> I guess its normal not to pass because the next gateways dont "know" what
> 10.x/192.x ips are.
> I think either you have to export those IPs to the next gateways either you
> enable nat
> for each VPN, smth like iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j
> MASQUERADE (fastest
> way) where eth0 is your interface for internet.
Local gateway eth0 10.6.1.1 ppp0 192.168.127.2
Remote gateway eth0 10.1.1.6 ppp0 192.168.127.1
Local routes add -net 10.1.0.0/16 gw 192.168.127.1
traceroute from local gateway to 10.1.1.1 gets as far as 192.168.127.1 and
stops
If you say ip_forward is enabled then either there is a routing problem
or some firewall issue.
--
Gary Stainburn
This email does not contain private or confidential material as it
may be snooped on by interested government parties for unknown
and undisclosed purposes - Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, 2000
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
