Le 07/01/2012 19:37, Kevin Martin a écrit :
On 01/07/2012 11:56 AM, Luc MAIGNAN wrote:
Le 07/01/2012 18:53, Kevin Martin a écrit :
On 01/07/2012 11:49 AM, Luc MAIGNAN wrote:
Le 07/01/2012 18:39, Kevin Martin a écrit :
On 01/07/2012 11:30 AM, Luc MAIGNAN wrote:
Le 07/01/2012 18:21, Kevin Martin a écrit :
On 01/07/2012 11:01 AM, Luc MAIGNAN wrote:
Yes, 50.184 is another box on the network on which the tunnel has been setup via racoon.
On 50.184 the access to 172.16.2.6 works fine. ANd I want to use 50.184 as a gateway for this host on the network.
What email address have I to use to do not top post ?
Le 07/01/2012 17:53, Kevin Martin a écrit :
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
Do you have ip forwarding turned on on the host that you are trying to route over the tunnel (the one with the 172.16.2.6
route)?
And not top-posting (or bottom posting) is simply done by posting your replies at the bottom of the thread, not the top. That
way
people can read from top-to-bottom of a thread (like a book). Makes the threads much easier to follow then top posting (the
Microsoft Outlook default).
Kevin
Yes the ip forwarding is enabled.
With the route table I've described, I am directed on 50.2 and If I place on it the route to 172.16.2.6 via gw 50.184 it works.
But I consider that It is not necessary to pass via 50.2
It is why I search a way to modify the routage table
Can you show a "traceroute 172.16.2.6" when you've got the tunnel up?
Kevin
traceroute to 172.16.2.6 (172.16.2.6), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 192.168.50.2 (192.168.50.2) 0.187 ms 0.166 ms 0.154 ms
2 192.168.50.184 (192.168.50.184) 0.545 ms 0.600 ms 0.603 ms
3 * * *
4 172.16.2.6 (172.16.2.6) 5.958 ms 4.324 ms 4.390 ms
It should use directly 50.184 and not first 50.2
Luc
What type of device is 50.2? Is it a switch of some kind?
Kevin
It is a fedora box, that works as a firewall/router
Luc
How is the box you are working on (what's the 192.168.50 address of that box, by the way) connected to the Fedora FW/RTR machine? Is
it a crossover cable, is it thru a hub of some kind, and the same question for the 192.168.50.184 machine?
Kevin
Both box are wired connected on the network thru a switch
Luc
--
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
