On 01/07/2012 10:46 AM, Luc MAIGNAN wrote: > 192.168.50.184 is a gateway on which a IPSEC tunnel allow to access to host 172.16.2.6 > > > > Le 07/01/2012 17:45, Kevin Martin a écrit : >> >> On 01/07/2012 10:18 AM, Luc MAIGNAN wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have the following problem. >>> >>> Here is the output of : route -n : >>> >>> 0.0.0.0 192.168.50.2 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 >>> 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 1002 0 0 eth0 >>> 172.16.2.6 192.168.50.184 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 eth0 >>> 192.168.50.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 >>> >>> >>> When I try to ping 172.16.2.6, it doesn't work while the first available route is used (0.0.0.0 via 192.168.50.2) >>> >>> How can I modify the order of the route table to force use of the right route ? >>> >>> >>> Thanks for any help >> What is 192.168.50.184? From the routing table, its the same ethernet nic so it's no wonder the route to 172.16.2.6 is using the >> 0.0.0.0 (default) route (even though it looks like you've tried to force it to a different route). If you want to split the >> 192.168.50 network you'll need two nics, you'll need to set the netmask correctly to split it between them, then you will be able to >> set the 172.16.2.6 host to route a different way. >> >> Kevin So the 50.184 address is another box which you have an ipsec tunnel to from the machine that this network route is on? How are you creating the tunnel? And please don't top post, it makes it hard to consistently read the thread. Kevin -- 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 Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
