On 05/15/2011 12:18 AM, JD wrote: > On 05/14/11 20:59, Kevin J. Cummings wrote: >> On 05/14/2011 11:42 PM, JD wrote: >>>> Can you add a "special" static route between the 2 specifying the router >>>> as the gateway? >>>> >>>> As I recall, LAN traffic assumes that anything sent on the local >>>> interface will get directly to anything else on the local network by >>>> just sending it. I'm not sure why the router doesn't "route" those >>>> packets when it sees them unless it assumes that if receives them over >>>> the wireless and the target machine is also wireless, that that would be >>>> redundant. >>>> >>>> Sometimes I used to set up static routes between machines, guaranteeing >>>> that the route the packets take will get there. something like: >>>> >>>> On machine w.x.y.2, sending to machine w.x.y.3, using the router at >>>> w.x.y.1 as the intermediary: >>>> >>>> # route add -host w.x.y.3 gw w.x.y.1 dev eth0 >>>> >>>> I'm not 100% sure this will work, because if the router is at fault, it >>>> may still fail. But its worth a try. >>>> >>> No that would not do anything because already the default route is >>> 192.168.1.254 >>> which is the gateway/router. >> No. The default route is only used when there is not a route found for >> the target machine. If the target machine is on the same subnet, then >> the packets just get sent out on the local network device. While its >> true that both the target machine and the router are on this network, >> this is the configuration that is not working for you. What you want is >> to either add a specific route "before" the local network route so that >> all traffic to that machine gets sent to the router, or, remove your >> local network route from your routing table. In that case, all you >> should have is a default route (that might work). >> >> This is my laptop routing table: >>> # route >>> Kernel IP routing table >>> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface >>> local.net * 255.255.255.0 U 2 0 0 eth1 >>> default 192.168.6.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1 >> Note that any traffic to my local network gets put on the local network. >> (This is the first routing line.) BTW, local.net is 192.168.6.0/24. >> >> If there is traffic for *anywhere* else, that's what invokes the default >> route, and that gets sent to my router. >> >> I'm suggesting that you either have: >> >> 192.168.1.108 192.168.1.254 255.255.255.0 UG wlan0 >> 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U wlan0 >> 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.254 0.0.0.0 UG wlan0 >> >> or you have only: >> >> 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.254 0.0.0.0 UG wlan0 >> >> I think you'll see a difference.... >> >> I'm also wondering if you'll have to do the something similar on the >> "other" wireless machine.... (192.168.1.108?) I'm assuming your 2 >> "wireless" machines are 192.168.1.60& 192.168.1.108, and that your >> router is 192.168.1.254. >> > I do not seem to be able to alter the routing table. > Current table on Fedora pc is: > $ route -vn > Kernel IP routing table > Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use > Iface > 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 > wlan0 > 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.254 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 > wlan0 > > I removed interfaces eth0 and virbr0 (i.e. I deactivated them) so they > no longer > get configured at bootup. > It simply cannot be a default route issue. The OP is attempting to ping a device on the 192.168.1.0 network from a device on the 192.168.1.0 network. They are local. No router will get involved with this communication. The machines themselves will not use their default route. They will use 802.3 layer-2 communications to talk with one another, i.e., MAC addresses. The traffic should be bridged/switched. Shane -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
