Les Mikesell escribió:
On 12/19/10 2:30 PM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote:
This doesn't make much sense without a route.  Can you try a traceroute to the
fedora box address from the 192.168.236.80 box to see how/why it gets there

Hope it helps (all addresses are 192.168. Trimmed to compact the schema):


----------      ----------     -----------
! 1.3    !------!1.100   !     !gw 236.21!
! gw 1.1 !   !  !  236.74!-----! 236.80  !
----------   !  ! gw 1.1 !  !  -----------
               !  ----------  !
               !              !
           [Router1]       [Router2]

Router 1 is a PFSense and its IP is 192.168.1.1
Router 2 is "something" (it is managed by other person, and i think is
somekind of win server) and IP is 192.168.236.21


This still doesn't explain why the 192.168.236.80 box can return packets to the fedora at 192.168.1.3 when you said it didn't have a route going through 192.168.236.74. Can you check what routes you do have on 192.168.236.80 and traceroute from there to 192.168.1.3?

Apologies by confusing you. I forgot that "the other" CentOS had 2 NICs, this is the machine where i began these tests. It's in a remote site and now when listing the routes remembered that.

It's conected to the 1. network with a second NIC and IP: 192.168.1.102. Replies must be return by that iface, really?
[r...@control ~]# route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
192.168.1.0     *               255.255.255.0   U     0      0        0 eth1
192.168.236.0   *               255.255.255.0   U     0      0        0 eth0
169.254.0.0     *               255.255.0.0     U     0      0        0 eth0
default 192.168.236.21 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0

I Configured a printer in the 236. network to use 192.168.236.74 as gateway and now i can access it from 1. Thanks.
[j...@idi ~]$ ping 192.168.236.74
PING 192.168.236.74 (192.168.236.74) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.236.74: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.276 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.236.74: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.245 ms

Thanks again

Best


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Scanned with Copfilter Version 0.84beta3a (ProxSMTP 1.6)
AntiVirus: ClamAV 0.95.2/12415 - Sun Dec 19 04:26:57 2010
by Markus Madlener @ http://www.copfilter.org
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Reply via email to