Second, since there is a ppp connection between the two hosts, not an ethernet connection, each would not show up in the other's arp table, whether a connection is working or not.
Third, from the tcpdump output on the pings, it appears that 192.168.1.1 is working properly (it sends both pings and ping replies, -AND- it replies to a request), but 192.168.10.1 does not see icmp traffic coming from 192.168.1.1. The possibilites to check are:
1. Does any firewalling on 192.168.1.1 interfere with transmission of icmp traffic? Depending on details you have not reported (what kernel you are using, what iptables or ipchains rulesets, some kernel switches set in the /proc filesystem) you may be blocking ping traffic at the server.
2. Related to (1), have you tested with anything ohter than ping? Can you, as an example, make an ssh connection between the two hosts?
3. Might there be a hardware problem at the "client" end? In the old days, for example, when a usable modem or NIC shared an IRQ with a Winmodem, the modem or NIC could send traffic but not receive replies. I haven't seen this in quite some time, but old problems do tend to come back. In general, is the modem on the client end known to work under Linux when connecting to someplace else?
4. I do not recall what the "DF"entry in the tcpdump output means, and I can't find a reference to it in the man page. Perhaps someone else here recognizes this and can jump in?
Fianlly, as to 169.254.0.0/16 ... this is a private address range used in the case of DHCP failures. Many DHCP clients are configured so that if they request a DHCP assignment and get no lease offers, they assign themselves a random address on this network. (The procedure is in the same addressing RFC as the more familiar private ranges, like 192.168.0.0/16.) In practice, the use for this is to facilitate hubness connections between two hosts (laptops, say) as temporary hookups for file transfer and the like. WIndows users are more familiar with this private-address range than are Linux users.
As to how it gets into *your* routing table ... how can I (or anyone) possibly say, when you don't say what Linux distro or version or kernel the "client" is using? Check its init scripts, wherever they are (it varies quite a bit from one distro to another) for one that sets up a routing table entry of this sort.
At 03:16 PM 3/28/2004 +0400, Anton Martchukov wrote:
Sorry for extra traffic to the list.
I've only one machine 192.168.1.1 with ethernet card attached to it, but with no other hosts in network 192.168.0.0/16. This machine is PPP server which assigns IP address 192.168.10.1 for connected client and tries to do proxyarp with no success. Here is some info I collected out after the ppp connection has been established:
ifconfig -a on 192.168.1.1
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:00:21:67:2C:49 inet addr:192.168.1.1 Bcast:192.168.255.255 Mask:255.255.0.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:69 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:69 collisions:1104 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:4140 (4.0 Kb) Interrupt:5 Base address:0x300
lo link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:98873 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:98873 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:11084300 (10.5 Mb) TX bytes:11084300 (10.5 Mb)
ppp0 link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol inet addr:192.168.1.1 P-t-P:192.168.10.1 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:576 Metric:1 RX packets:5 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:5 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:3 RX bytes:102 (102.0 b) TX bytes:96 (96.0 b)
route -n on 192.168.1.1
192.168.10.1 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
ifconfig -a on 192.168.10.1
lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:147 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:147 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:15516 (15.1 Kb) TX bytes:15516 (15.1 Kb)
ppp0 Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol inet addr:192.168.10.1 P-t-P:192.168.1.1 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:576 Metric:1 RX packets:134 errors:33 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:111 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:3 RX bytes:2017 (1.9 Kb) TX bytes:2686 (2.6 Kb)
route -n on 192.168.10.1
192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0 169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0
Then ping on both hosts has been run ping 192.168.10.1 (from 192.168.1.1) ping 192.168.1.1 (from 192.168.10.1) Both of pings told nothing, but 100% packet loss. Packets were also dumped by tcpdump on both machines.
tcpdump -n -i ppp0 on 192.168.1.1
02:11:31.477168 192.168.1.1 > 192.168.10.1: icmp: echo request (DF) 02:11:31.482446 192.168.10.1 > 192.168.1.1: icmp: echo request (DF) 02:11:31.482672 192.168.1.1 > 192.168.10.1: icmp: echo reply
There were no echo reply from 192.168.10.1 to 192.168.1.1 tcpdump running on eth0 and lo on 192.168.1.1 shows no packets.
tcpdump -n -i ppp0 on 192.168.10.1
02:39:33.552747 192.168.10.1 > 192.168.1.1: icmp: echo request (DF)
There were no echo reply from 192.168.1.1 to 192.168.10.1 :-(
Finally arp table on both hosts after ping:
arp -n on 192.168.1.1
192.168.10.1 * * MP eth0
arp -n on 192.168.10.1 shows nothing.
Manually running "arp -i eth0 -s 192.168.1.1 -D eth0" on 192.168.1.1 did nothing, but appropriate record in arp cache of 192.168.1.1.
I'm not sure whether I really need proxyarp, but in manuals I've read were pointed that it's the easiest way of getting working remote network access in may case (I need only one client to access only my computer).
And could anybody tell me what the hell with this 169.254.0.0/16 network? Nobody ever specified it anywhere on both hosts.
Thank you!
- 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
