On Sunday 01 September 2002 19:20, Jim Earl wrote: > Hello all, > > I have been configuring a linux box to function as a router, ran into some > problems, and think that I traced the problem to a faulty routing table. > So I brought down all my interfaces and routing table ( except lo ) and > attempted to add them manually.
A complete routing table would have been of more help here; > > I was able to add an interface manually, assigning my eth0 device the IP > addr 192.168.1.2. ifconfig verifys that this if is good to go. > > However, I found that I was unable to give a simple "route" command, for > example: > > route add 192.168.1.2 There is nothing wrong there as what would a route to "yourself" be of any use to you. > > gives the response: > > SIOCADDRT: No such device Yup thats normal with that command. > > the man page for route implies that you can specify the device in the route > command also: > > route add 192.168.1.2 dev eth0 > > Still no good. Various stabs at syntax based on the route man page also > yield nothing As above, you cant and dont need a route to you "own interface". > I have also found that after issuing the ifconfig command, the routing > table is automatically updated with an entry for a route to that network: > > Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric REf Use Iface > 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 > > Though this seems sloppy- note that Flags column lacks an "N" for Network. No not sloppy at all, note your netmask 255.255.255.0 So ifconfig adds a route accordingly. If you dislike the above use the netmask option with "ifconfig" > > This is undocumented behavior, as everywhere I have looked it has been > implied that one has to bring up an interface and also independently > establish the route to it. I would like to be able to add a route to the > host itself, indicating that it is its own gateway ( I believe this is the > root of my router problem- no pun intended . Can someone verify this?) Not at all, a route is assigned according to the netmask used with ifconfig. I think it would be better if you stated your router problem and supply details of the routing table and output of ifconfig. route -ne ifconfig -a + of course a description of just what you want to do. The problem which most folks have is that they need to define a default route via an interface. Simply upping an interface on a machine does not automaticly mean you have a working routing table. > > Of course, Thanks in advance, > > Jim > -- Regards Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.zeelandnet.nl/pa3gcu/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs
