Ray,

Thank you for your very quick response to the inconsistent information
posted to the list.
I've mailed this response to the list as well as yourself as the solution to
the problem may be of interest.

In the very first post I had the following set-up

Win95 ----Oxygen----- win2k pro

I was able to ping win2k from win9x box but not vice versa.

In second post I had the following set-up

win9x ----Oxygen---- LRP

I was able to ping both LRP and win9x from oxygen box, however when I tried
pinging LRP from win9x it wouldn't work.

The solution to the problem was that I had the Cisco VPN v3.6 on the win9x
box and the win2k box with enable statefull firewall option turned on.

Turn it off and the configuration works.

Both machines work OK on my live network but in the test environment with
the Oxygen box doing the routing both failed.

Hope this helps someone else

Thanks yet again for such a quick response.

Cheers

Martin


-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Olszewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 02 December 2002 21:09
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [leaf-user] Problems connecting to devices on eth0


At 08:34 PM 12/2/02 +0000, Wheldon,M wrote:
>Hi,
>
>         Sorry about the lack of information in the previous post.
Hopefully
>what follows will help.

Not a bit, I'm sorry to say. Because this is not the same configuration 
that you reported having trouble with.

This router (according to what you report) connects networks 192.168.0.0/24 
and 192.168.10.0/24 . And you report no symptoms of any trouble with it 
(for example, all the pings work just as they should).

Your earlier message reported a problem with a router that connected 
networks 192.168.1/0/24 and 10.18.0.0/24 . Associated with it was an 
undescribed "unable to ping" from one LAN to the other.

Please report the same details for the router that is having the problems 
as you reported here for the one that is (apparently) not having any 
problems. Or describe a symptom of the one you are giving us details about, 
if it is exhibiting problems. Or, if the problems relate somehow to the 
interaction between two routers, tell us all the details.


>#uname -a
>Linux myrouter 2.2.19brfw #5 Thu May 10 21:25:38 CDT 2001 i686 unknown
>
>#ip addr show
>1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP> mtu 3924 qdisc noqueue
>     link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
>     inet 127.0.0.1/8 brd 127.255.255.255 scope host lo
>2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 100
>     link/ether 52:54:00:e8:cc:46 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>     inet 192.168.10.254/24 brd 192.168.10.255 scope global eth0
>3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 100
>     link/ether 00:50:bf:7e:c9:48 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>     inet 192.168.0.254/24 brd 192.168.0.255 scope global eth1
>
>#ip route show
>192.168.0.254 dev eth1  scope link
>192.168.10.254 dev eth0  scope link
>192.168.0.0/24 dev eth1  proto kernel  scope link  src 192.168.0.254
>192.168.10.0/24 dev eth0  proto kernel  scope link  src 192.168.10.254
>127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
>default via 192.168.10.254 dev eth0
>
>#lsmod
>Module                  Size  Used by
>ext2                   40800   2
>rtl8139                12348   1
>ne2k-pci                4688   1
>8390                    6340   0 [ne2k-pci]
>
>#ipchains -nvL
>Chain input (policy ACCEPT: 83 packets, 7028 bytes):
>Chain forward (policy ACCEPT: 8 packets, 480 bytes):
>Chain output (policy ACCEPT: 131 packets, 10156 bytes):
>
>#tail /var/log/messages
>Dec  2 10:59:21 myrouter kernel: RAMDISK: Uncompressing root archive: done.
>Dec  2 10:59:21 myrouter kernel: RAMDISK: Auto Filesystem - minix: 5461i
>16384bk 176fdz(176) 1024zs 2147483647ms
>Dec  2 10:59:21 myrouter kernel: VFS: Mounted root (minix filesystem).
>Dec  2 10:59:21 myrouter kernel: RAMDISK: Extracting root archive: done.
>Dec  2 10:59:21 myrouter kernel: ne2k-pci.c: v1.02 for Linux 2.2,
>10/19/2000, D. Becker/P. Gortmaker,
>http://www.scyld.com/network/ne2k-pci.html
>Dec  2 10:59:21 myrouter kernel: ne2k-pci.c: PCI NE2000 clone 'RealTek
>RTL-8029' at I/O 0xcc00, IRQ 9.
>Dec  2 10:59:21 myrouter kernel: eth0: RealTek RTL-8029 found at 0xcc00,
IRQ
>9, 52:54:00:E8:CC:46.
>Dec  2 10:59:21 myrouter kernel: rtl8139.c:v1.07 5/6/99 Donald Becker
>http://cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov/linux/drivers/rtl8139.html
>Dec  2 10:59:21 myrouter kernel: eth1: RealTek RTL8139 Fast Ethernet at
>0xc800, IRQ 10, 00:50:bf:7e:c9:48.
>Dec  2 10:59:21 myrouter kernel: Freeing unused kernel memory: 48k freed
>
>192.168.0.26 is a windows 95 box
>#ping -c 3 192.168.0.26
>PING 192.168.0.26 (192.168.0.26): 56 data bytes
>64 bytes from 192.168.0.26: icmp_seq=0 ttl=128 time=0.5 ms
>64 bytes from 192.168.0.26: icmp_seq=1 ttl=128 time=0.4 ms
>64 bytes from 192.168.0.26: icmp_seq=2 ttl=128 time=0.4 ms
>
>--- 192.168.0.26 ping statistics ---
>3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0% packet loss
>round-trip min/avg/max = 0.4/0.4/0.5 ms
>
>192.168.10.1 is another lrp box
>#ping -c 3 192.168.10.1
>PING 192.168.10.1 (192.168.10.1): 56 data bytes
>64 bytes from 192.168.10.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=2.4 ms
>64 bytes from 192.168.10.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=2.3 ms
>64 bytes from 192.168.10.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=2.3 ms
>
>--- 192.168.10.1 ping statistics ---
>3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0% packet loss
>round-trip min/avg/max = 2.3/2.3/2.4 ms
>
>It would seem that I may have a routing problem but to my eyes the routes
>look fine.
>
>Thanks again in advanced
>
>Martin
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ray Olszewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: 02 December 2002 16:40
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [leaf-user] Problems connecting to devices on eth0
>
>
>Please describe the symptoms more exactly. "unable to ping" is too vague to
>diagnose; pings fail in many distinct ways, and we need to know which of
>them you are seeing. (See the various LEAF FAQs on ping problems for the
>details here.)
>
>In addition to the stuff the FAQs ask for, please tell us what OSs the
>systems at 10.18.0.26 and (especially) 192.168.0.11 run ... in particular,
>do you KNOW (based on an actual test) that the system at 192.168.0.11 will
>itself respond to pings?
>
>Also, can each system ping its "local" interface address on the LEAF
>router? What about the other address on the LEAF router?
>
>I'm a bit uncertain as to what you mean by "transparent proxy"; the term,
>in my limited experience, applies to a (Web, usually) proxy server that the
>clients do not need special configuration to use, but I'm doubtful that
>this is what you mean. Do you just mean an ordinary (non-NAT'ing) router?
>Or does the LEAF router need to do proxy arp on both interfaces? If the
>latter, is it possible that you've configured it to proxy arp one network
>but not the other?
>
>And just in case we're missing something "obvious", it would be wise to
>include ALL the basic information the SR FAQ asks for in your follow-up.
>
>At 08:55 AM 12/2/02 +0000, Wheldon,M wrote:
> >Hi Folks,
> >
> >         I'm using the latest version of Oxygen which I'm in the process
of
> >setting up as a transparent proxy. I have run into a problem with trying
to
> >connect to devices that are physically on eth0 the external interface.
> >
> >ASCII Art to follow
> >
> >
> >192.168.0.11 --------eth1|  |eth0-------- 10.18.0.26
> >
> >eth1 = 192.168.0.254
> >eth0 = 10.18.0.254
> >
> >I can ping 10.18.0.26 from 192.168.0.11 fine, but am unable to ping
> >192.168.0.11 from 10.18.0.26
> >I've removed all the firewall rules
> >
> >#ipchains -L gives me
> >Chain input (policy ACCEPT)
> >Chain forward (policy ACCEPT)
> >Chain output (policy ACCEPT)
> >
> >#route gives me
> >192.168.0.254   *       255.255.255.255 UH      0       0       0
>eth1
> >10.18.0.254             *       255.255.255.255 UH      0       0       0
> >eth0
> >192.18.0.0              *       255.255.255.0   U       0       0       0
> >eth0
> >192.168.0.0             *       255.255.255.0   U       0       0       0
> >eth1
> >localnet                *       255.0.0.0               U       0       0
> >0       lo
> >
> >I've enabled
> >net.ipv4.icmp_echo_ignore_all = 0 in /etc/sysctl.conf
> >
> >Help!!!!!!
> >
> >Thanks in advance




--
-------------------------------------------"Never tell me the odds!"--------
Ray Olszewski                                   -- Han Solo
Palo Alto, California, USA                        [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Get the new Palm Tungsten T 
handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! 
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0002en
------------------------------------------------------------------------
leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
------------------------------------------------------------------------
leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html

Reply via email to