On Fri, 2003-02-28 at 11:32, Kenneth E. Lussier wrote: > > Here's something interesting .... I tried this. I'm at work at the > > moment (192.168.1.x) so I ssh'd into both .1 (gateway) boxes and ran > > tcpdump -n -i any. Then, from my local machine (192.168.1.69) I tried > > to ping 192.168.2.1. > > > > The 192.168.1.1 box showed the icmp requests immediately - including the > > reply. Here's where the interesting part comes in - the remote gateway > > (192.168.2.1) started showing packets around 10 to 20 seconds *later*?!? > > That could just be the latency on the ssh connection. The packets were > received/sent, but the display of the tcpdump didn't echo back right > away.
I don't seem to have that kind of latency with anything else on the remote box... Wouldn't it have to be under some serious load for tcpdump not to display the packets for >10 seconds? Admittedly, it's only a ppro 200, but the load on it is pretty nil. > So, the ping went from your subnet box (192.168.1.69) to the internal > interface of the local gateway (192.168.1.1) out the tunnel to the > opposite gateway (192.168.2.1), Seemingly true as far as I can tell. > then back to the internal interface of > the local gateway? Or did it come back to the external interface? tcpdump -i any doesn't seem to give me the interface the packet shows up on. Is there a way to make it do that? Didn't see it in the man page. I could run a separate tcpdump on each interface if it matters too much. > Either way, it never reached 192.168.1.69 again, right? This appears to be true. 192.168.1.69 is reporting 100% packet loss. -- "Lottery: A tax on people who are bad at math." Cole Tuininga Lead Developer Code Energy, Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Key ID: 0x43E5755D _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
