Oh well.. that's not a good reason. ;) What is the output of: ip route show default on both boxes?? I'll review it at home later... I'm leaving the office. On 9/9/05, Jonathan <phonic@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I think so. On box1 I type these commands: > # ifconfig eth0:5 192.121.234.213 netmask 255.255.255.240 broadcast > 192.121.234.223 > # ip route add 192.121.234.213 via 10.1.0.2 (10.1.0.2 is the tunnel's > endpoint on box2) > > on box1: > # ifconfig lo:0 192.121.234.213 netmask 255.255.255.255 > # ip rule add from 192.121.234.213 lookup 10 > # ip route add default via 10.1.0.1 table 10 > > and when I ssh 192.121.234.213 from box1, I come to box2. > > I have also noticed that 192.121.234.213 exists in the kernel routing > table on box1, so I deleted it and when I then ssh 192.121.234.213 from > the outside I get the error "no route to host". > > So the routing seems to be correct, right? > And why I set up the tunneled address on lo is because a guy told me to do > that. ;-) > > > Well.. routing in this case is not single point problem.... but both > > points have to route correctly to make it "happen". You sure the other > > machine is routing through the VPN tunnel when replying? > > > > On 9/9/05, Jonathan <phonic@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> I have already set up routes exactly like that one. :-) > >> > >> The purpose is that I want to have a static IP on my home box. I have a > >> /28 addressed on a box so I thought I could tunnel one of these > >> addresses > >> to my box home. > >> > >> And the problem; when I ping/ssh/whatever 192.121.234.213 from the > >> /28-box > >> (box1), the traffic goes through 10.1.0.1 to 10.1.0.2 and reaches my > >> home > >> box. But when I ping/ssh/whatever from outside the traffic goes to box1. > >> That's why I think NATing the connections will solve the problem. But > >> maybe I'm wrong? > >> > >> > IPTABLES? I think it's a routing problem, not a firewall one. > >> > > >> > ip route add 192.121.234.213 via 10.1.0.2 > >> > I think that would do the first part of your problem. > >> > > >> > But why do you have an IP address (not 127/8) set on a loopback > >> interface? > >> > > >> > On 9/9/05, Jonathan <phonic@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> Hello, > >> >> I have the following interface configuration on two boxes: > >> >> box1: eth0:5 192.121.234.213 netmask 255.255.255.240 broadcast > >> >> 192.121.234.223 > >> >> box2: lo:0 192.121.234.213 netmask 255.255.255.255 > >> >> between box1 and box2 I have a OpenVPN tunnel (endpoints 10.1.0.1 and > >> >> 10.1.0.2). > >> >> > >> >> I want to forward all packages on box1 with destination > >> 192.121.234.213 > >> >> to > >> >> tun0 (10.1.0.1), so theWy pass through the tunnel and comes to box2. > >> I > >> >> also > >> >> want to forward all packages from tun0 (10.1.0.1) to eth0:5 > >> >> (192.121.234.213). How do I do this with iptables? > >> >> > >> >> Regards > >> >> Jonathan > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > >
