Re: Help with routing question.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 9:31 AM, James B. Byrne <byrnejb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>
> On Thu, February 19, 2015 12:33, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 9:48 AM, James B. Byrne
> > <byrnejb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I added these directives to the route-eth0:192 file:
> >>>
> >>> ADDRESS0=192.168.6.9
> >>> NETMASK0=255.255.255.0
> >>> GATEWAY0=192.168.6.1
> >>>
> >>
> >> Which should have been:
> >>
> >> ADDRESS0=192.168.6.0
> >>
> >> NETMASK0=255.255.255.0
> >> GATEWAY0=192.168.6.1
>

If you were to use ip route syntax, I believe you could set a Metric so you
have a floating default route out the 192.168.6.0/24 network.

192.168.6.0/24 via 192.168.6.1 metric 10

There may be a way (though not mentioned in the docs below) to accomplish
the same thing using network/netmask syntax you used in your example.

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Deployment_Guide/s1-networkscripts-static-routes.html
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Deployment_Guide/sec-Configuring_Static_Routes_in_ifcfg_files.html
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Deployment_Guide/sec-networkscripts-static-routes-network-netmask-directives.html


> >>
> >
> > But it still doesn't matter.  Your netmask in the ifcfg- file already
> > covers that range and you don't need another route/GATEWAY for it.
> > You don't need the route- file at all.
>
>
Agreed, no need for a route file.  Just pull the gateway line from the
ifcfg file for the internal network.
( I'm just posting the syntax/alternatives for anybody else's sake. )


>
> Thank you.  I was grasping at straws in this case to solve a strange
> routing problem that turned out to be a misconfigured gateway
> firewall.  It was a very odd error because it only affected one of our
> off-site net-blocks. So tracking it down cause a little more
> hair-pulling than usual.
>
> Fixed for now.
>
>
> --
> ***          E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel          ***
> James B. Byrne                mailto:ByrneJB@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Harte & Lyne Limited          http://www.harte-lyne.ca
> 9 Brockley Drive              vox: +1 905 561 1241
> Hamilton, Ontario             fax: +1 905 561 0757
> Canada  L8E 3C3
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>



-- 
---~~.~~---
Mike
//  SilverTip257  //
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos




[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [CentOS Announce]     [CentOS Development]     [CentOS ARM Devel]     [CentOS Docs]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Carrier Grade Linux]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Linux USB]
  Powered by Linux