Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677]
Bulent, Thank you for the reply. I am afraid you may have misunderstood this problem. Allow me to be more clear: 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.150 - Host A - 128.59.39.3 | (dual homed server) | | | | | 128.59.39.2 router A router C Internet | 192.168.1.1 | | T1 | | 192.168.1.2 | router B | 192.168.2.1 The problem happens on Host A. Host A is a WebServer with 2 interfaces: a public (which goes out to the internet) and a private (which talks to the database). The private interface has IP 192.168.0.150 and default GW 192.168.0.1. The public has ip 128.59.39.3 and default GW 128.59.39.2. Everything works fine if I leave the private interface's default GW blank. If I put Router C's address as the private interface's default gateway, after some time I cannot ping anywhere from Host A, even though I can ping it from the outside world. I need to have the private interface configured with 192.168.0.1 as the default GW because remote users need to be able to connect to that server via the back-end T1. Any light would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, -H - Original Message - From: "B|lent ^ahin" To: Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 3:17 AM Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > When configuring ethernet interfaces on MS environment, you have three blank > spaces to fill: IP_address, Subnet_mask and Default_gateway. So the people > start to think every ethernet interface as a router: "This interface will > route IP packets to the other interface, so the default gateway of the first > interface should be same as the IP address of the second interface.", but > there is one router on the PC: CPU. Try to configure only one default > gateway. You can use the command "route print" to see what happens when you > configure two or more default gateways. > > Bulent > > > -Original Message- > From: Henrique Duarte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 12:39 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > Hello All, > > I am working on some dual homed servers at a co-location where there is a > public and private interface on each. The public interfaces attach to the > internet via a router while the private ones are on its own separate private > subnet. The private subnet is attached to another router, which provides > remote users access to the private network via a T1 line. I am encountering > the following issue. When I set the private interfaces' default gateway to > the private interface's router address, it works fine for about 10 minutes > or so, but after that the server cannot ping and/or access the internet, > even though it is set with the public NIC to be the primary one. However, as > soon as I take the default gateway out of the private interface NIC it works > fine and is able to ping the outside world. Does anyone have any ideas why > this is happening and/or how to fix it? The servers are running Windows 2000 > Server and the T1 router is a Cisco 1601. > > Thanks, > > -Henrique Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=43788&t=43677 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677]
I believe your issue may relate to the single IP stack on 2000. Try defaulting traffic to the internet and adding a static route to the internal network opposed to specifying the gateway on the internal IP interface. Also I would go as far as disabling any NETBIOS on the external interface for security. cmd would be: route add -p Network Mask Gateway - Original Message - From: "Henrique Duarte" To: Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 5:48 PM Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > Bulent, > > Thank you for the reply. I am afraid you may have misunderstood this > problem. Allow me to be more clear: > > > 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.150 - Host A - 128.59.39.3 > | (dual homed > server) > | > | > | > | > | > 128.59.39.2 > router A router > C Internet > | > 192.168.1.1 > | > | >T1 > | > | > 192.168.1.2 > | > router B > | > 192.168.2.1 > > > The problem happens on Host A. Host A is a WebServer with 2 interfaces: a > public (which goes out to the internet) and a private (which talks to the > database). The private interface has IP 192.168.0.150 and default GW > 192.168.0.1. The public has ip 128.59.39.3 and default GW 128.59.39.2. > Everything works fine if I leave the private interface's default GW blank. > If I put Router C's address as the private interface's default gateway, > after some time I cannot ping anywhere from Host A, even though I can ping > it from the outside world. I need to have the private interface configured > with 192.168.0.1 as the default GW because remote users need to be able to > connect to that server via the back-end T1. Any light would be greatly > appreciated. > > Thanks, > > -H > > > - Original Message - > From: "B|lent ^ahin" > To: > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 3:17 AM > Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > When configuring ethernet interfaces on MS environment, you have three > blank > > spaces to fill: IP_address, Subnet_mask and Default_gateway. So the people > > start to think every ethernet interface as a router: "This interface will > > route IP packets to the other interface, so the default gateway of the > first > > interface should be same as the IP address of the second interface.", but > > there is one router on the PC: CPU. Try to configure only one default > > gateway. You can use the command "route print" to see what happens when > you > > configure two or more default gateways. > > > > Bulent > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Henrique Duarte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 12:39 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > Hello All, > > > > I am working on some dual homed servers at a co-location where there is a > > public and private interface on each. The public interfaces attach to the > > internet via a router while the private ones are on its own separate > private > > subnet. The private subnet is attached to another router, which provides > > remote users access to the private network via a T1 line. I am > encountering > > the following issue. When I set the private interfaces' default gateway to > > the private interface's router address, it works fine for about 10 minutes > > or so, but after that the server cannot ping and/or access the internet, > > even though it is set with the public NIC to be the primary one. However, > as > > soon as I take the default gateway out of the private interface NIC it > works > > fine and is able to ping the outside world. Does anyone have any ideas why > > this is happening and/or how to fix it? The servers are running Windows > 2000 > > Server and the T1 router is a Cisco 1601. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Henrique Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=43790&t=43677 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677]
Thanks Galo! I will try that. -h - Original Message - From: "Galo Villacis" To: Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 7:17 PM Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > I believe your issue may relate to the single IP stack on 2000. Try > defaulting traffic to the internet and adding a static route to the internal > network opposed to specifying the gateway on the internal IP interface. > Also I would go as far as disabling any NETBIOS on the external interface > for security. > > cmd would be: > > route add -p Network Mask Gateway > > - Original Message - > From: "Henrique Duarte" > To: > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 5:48 PM > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > Bulent, > > > > Thank you for the reply. I am afraid you may have misunderstood this > > problem. Allow me to be more clear: > > > > > > 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.150 - Host A - 128.59.39.3 > > | (dual > homed > > server) > > | > > | > > | > > | > > | > > 128.59.39.2 > > router A router > > C Internet > > | > > 192.168.1.1 > > | > > | > >T1 > > | > > | > > 192.168.1.2 > > | > > router B > > | > > 192.168.2.1 > > > > > > The problem happens on Host A. Host A is a WebServer with 2 interfaces: > a > > public (which goes out to the internet) and a private (which talks to the > > database). The private interface has IP 192.168.0.150 and default GW > > 192.168.0.1. The public has ip 128.59.39.3 and default GW 128.59.39.2. > > Everything works fine if I leave the private interface's default GW blank. > > If I put Router C's address as the private interface's default gateway, > > after some time I cannot ping anywhere from Host A, even though I can ping > > it from the outside world. I need to have the private interface > configured > > with 192.168.0.1 as the default GW because remote users need to be able to > > connect to that server via the back-end T1. Any light would be greatly > > appreciated. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -H > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "B|lent ^ahin" > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 3:17 AM > > Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > When configuring ethernet interfaces on MS environment, you have three > > blank > > > spaces to fill: IP_address, Subnet_mask and Default_gateway. So the > people > > > start to think every ethernet interface as a router: "This interface > will > > > route IP packets to the other interface, so the default gateway of the > > first > > > interface should be same as the IP address of the second interface.", > but > > > there is one router on the PC: CPU. Try to configure only one default > > > gateway. You can use the command "route print" to see what happens when > > you > > > configure two or more default gateways. > > > > > > Bulent > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Henrique Duarte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 12:39 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > > Hello All, > > > > > > I am working on some dual homed servers at a co-location where there is > a > > > public and private interface on each. The public interfaces attach to > the > > > internet via a router while the private ones are on its own separate > > private > > > subnet. The private subnet is attached to another router, which provides > > > remote users access to the private network via a T1 line. I am > > encountering > > > the following issue. When I set the private interfaces' default gateway > to > > > the private interface's router address, it works fine for about 10 > minutes > > > or so, but after that the server cannot ping and/or access the internet, > > > even though it is set with the public NIC to be the primary one. > However, > > as > > > soon as I take the default gateway out of the private interface NIC it > > works > > > fine and is able to ping the outside world. Does anyone have any ideas > why > > > this is happening and/or how to fix it? The servers are running Windows > > 2000 > > > Server and the T1 router is a Cisco 1601. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > -Henrique Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=43800&t=43677 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677]
I just talked to someone yesterday who said they are running OSPF on the WIN2000 servers and using dual NICs effectively. Is this a better way to dual home servers? Jeffrey Reed Classic Networking, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Galo Villacis Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 7:18 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] I believe your issue may relate to the single IP stack on 2000. Try defaulting traffic to the internet and adding a static route to the internal network opposed to specifying the gateway on the internal IP interface. Also I would go as far as disabling any NETBIOS on the external interface for security. cmd would be: route add -p Network Mask Gateway - Original Message - From: "Henrique Duarte" To: Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 5:48 PM Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > Bulent, > > Thank you for the reply. I am afraid you may have misunderstood this > problem. Allow me to be more clear: > > > 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.150 - Host A - 128.59.39.3 > | (dual homed > server) > | > | > | > | > | > 128.59.39.2 > router A router > C Internet > | > 192.168.1.1 > | > | >T1 > | > | > 192.168.1.2 > | > router B > | > 192.168.2.1 > > > The problem happens on Host A. Host A is a WebServer with 2 interfaces: a > public (which goes out to the internet) and a private (which talks to the > database). The private interface has IP 192.168.0.150 and default GW > 192.168.0.1. The public has ip 128.59.39.3 and default GW 128.59.39.2. > Everything works fine if I leave the private interface's default GW blank. > If I put Router C's address as the private interface's default gateway, > after some time I cannot ping anywhere from Host A, even though I can ping > it from the outside world. I need to have the private interface configured > with 192.168.0.1 as the default GW because remote users need to be able to > connect to that server via the back-end T1. Any light would be greatly > appreciated. > > Thanks, > > -H > > > - Original Message - > From: "B|lent ^ahin" > To: > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 3:17 AM > Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > When configuring ethernet interfaces on MS environment, you have three > blank > > spaces to fill: IP_address, Subnet_mask and Default_gateway. So the people > > start to think every ethernet interface as a router: "This interface will > > route IP packets to the other interface, so the default gateway of the > first > > interface should be same as the IP address of the second interface.", but > > there is one router on the PC: CPU. Try to configure only one default > > gateway. You can use the command "route print" to see what happens when > you > > configure two or more default gateways. > > > > Bulent > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Henrique Duarte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 12:39 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > Hello All, > > > > I am working on some dual homed servers at a co-location where there is a > > public and private interface on each. The public interfaces attach to the > > internet via a router while the private ones are on its own separate > private > > subnet. The private subnet is attached to another router, which provides > > remote users access to the private network via a T1 line. I am > encountering > > the following issue. When I set the private interfaces' default gateway to > > the private interface's router address, it works fine for about 10 minutes > > or so, but after that the server cannot ping and/or access the internet, > > even though it is set with the public NIC to be the primary one. However, > as > > soon as I take the default gateway out of the private interface NIC it > works > > fine and is able to ping the outside world. Does anyone have any ideas why > > this is happening and/or how to fix it? The servers are running Windows > 2000 > > Server and the T1 router is a Cisco 1601. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Henrique Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=43822&t=43677 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677]
I may be wrong but your friend is using a routing protocol and therefore the below would not apply to the scenario. As for running SOP on the server IMHO it would be overkill for this specific situation. "Keep it simple." Would I run SOP on a server? Depends on why I had the server built in the first place. Have a nice day! - Original Message - From: "Jeffrey Reed" To: Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 8:27 AM Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > I just talked to someone yesterday who said they are running OSPF on the > WIN2000 servers and using dual NICs effectively. Is this a better way to > dual home servers? > > Jeffrey Reed > Classic Networking, Inc. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Galo > Villacis > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 7:18 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > I believe your issue may relate to the single IP stack on 2000. Try > defaulting traffic to the internet and adding a static route to the internal > network opposed to specifying the gateway on the internal IP interface. > Also I would go as far as disabling any NETBIOS on the external interface > for security. > > cmd would be: > > route add -p Network Mask Gateway > > - Original Message ----- > From: "Henrique Duarte" > To: > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 5:48 PM > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > Bulent, > > > > Thank you for the reply. I am afraid you may have misunderstood this > > problem. Allow me to be more clear: > > > > > > 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.150 - Host A - 128.59.39.3 > > | (dual > homed > > server) > > | > > | > > | > > | > > | > > 128.59.39.2 > > router A router > > C Internet > > | > > 192.168.1.1 > > | > > | > >T1 > > | > > | > > 192.168.1.2 > > | > > router B > > | > > 192.168.2.1 > > > > > > The problem happens on Host A. Host A is a WebServer with 2 interfaces: > a > > public (which goes out to the internet) and a private (which talks to the > > database). The private interface has IP 192.168.0.150 and default GW > > 192.168.0.1. The public has ip 128.59.39.3 and default GW 128.59.39.2. > > Everything works fine if I leave the private interface's default GW blank. > > If I put Router C's address as the private interface's default gateway, > > after some time I cannot ping anywhere from Host A, even though I can ping > > it from the outside world. I need to have the private interface > configured > > with 192.168.0.1 as the default GW because remote users need to be able to > > connect to that server via the back-end T1. Any light would be greatly > > appreciated. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -H > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "B|lent ^ahin" > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 3:17 AM > > Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > When configuring ethernet interfaces on MS environment, you have three > > blank > > > spaces to fill: IP_address, Subnet_mask and Default_gateway. So the > people > > > start to think every ethernet interface as a router: "This interface > will > > > route IP packets to the other interface, so the default gateway of the > > first > > > interface should be same as the IP address of the second interface.", > but > > > there is one router on the PC: CPU. Try to configure only one default > > > gateway. You can use the command "route print" to see what happens when > > you > > > configure two or more default gateways. > > > > > > Bulent > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Henrique Duarte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 12:39 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > > Hello All, > > > > > > I am working on some dual homed servers at a co-location where there is > a > > > public and private interface on each. The public interfaces attach to > the > > > internet via a router while the private ones are on its own sep
Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677]
Sorry list members, the spell-checker changed OSPF to SOP. - Original Message - From: "Maximus" To: Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 12:40 PM Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > I may be wrong but your friend is using a routing protocol and therefore the > below would not apply to the scenario. > As for running SOP on the server IMHO it would be overkill for this specific > situation. "Keep it simple." > Would I run SOP on a server? > Depends on why I had the server built in the first place. Have a nice day! > > - Original Message - > From: "Jeffrey Reed" > To: > Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 8:27 AM > Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > I just talked to someone yesterday who said they are running OSPF on the > > WIN2000 servers and using dual NICs effectively. Is this a better way to > > dual home servers? > > > > Jeffrey Reed > > Classic Networking, Inc. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Galo > > Villacis > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 7:18 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > I believe your issue may relate to the single IP stack on 2000. Try > > defaulting traffic to the internet and adding a static route to the > internal > > network opposed to specifying the gateway on the internal IP interface. > > Also I would go as far as disabling any NETBIOS on the external interface > > for security. > > > > cmd would be: > > > > route add -p Network Mask Gateway > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Henrique Duarte" > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 5:48 PM > > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > Bulent, > > > > > > Thank you for the reply. I am afraid you may have misunderstood this > > > problem. Allow me to be more clear: > > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.150 - Host A - 128.59.39.3 > > > | (dual > > homed > > > server) > > > | > > > | > > > | > > > | > > > | > > > 128.59.39.2 > > > router A router > > > C Internet > > > | > > > 192.168.1.1 > > > | > > > | > > >T1 > > > | > > > | > > > 192.168.1.2 > > > | > > > router B > > > | > > > 192.168.2.1 > > > > > > > > > The problem happens on Host A. Host A is a WebServer with 2 > interfaces: > > a > > > public (which goes out to the internet) and a private (which talks to > the > > > database). The private interface has IP 192.168.0.150 and default GW > > > 192.168.0.1. The public has ip 128.59.39.3 and default GW 128.59.39.2. > > > Everything works fine if I leave the private interface's default GW > blank. > > > If I put Router C's address as the private interface's default gateway, > > > after some time I cannot ping anywhere from Host A, even though I can > ping > > > it from the outside world. I need to have the private interface > > configured > > > with 192.168.0.1 as the default GW because remote users need to be able > to > > > connect to that server via the back-end T1. Any light would be greatly > > > appreciated. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > -H > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "B|lent ^ahin" > > > To: > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 3:17 AM > > > Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > > > When configuring ethernet interfaces on MS environment, you have three > > > blank > > > > spaces to fill: IP_address, Subnet_mask and Default_gateway. So the > > people > > > > start to think every ethernet interface as a router: "This interface > > will > > > > route IP packets to the other interface, so the default gateway of the > > > first > > > > interface should be same as the IP address of the second interface.", > > but > > > > there is one router on the PC: CPU. Try to configure only one default > > > > gateway. You can use the command "route print"
Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677]
At 12:35 PM 5/10/02, Maximus wrote: >Sorry list members, the spell-checker changed OSPF to SOP. I think OSPF should be SOB. Just kidding! :-) Priscilla >- Original Message - >From: "Maximus" >To: >Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 12:40 PM >Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > I may be wrong but your friend is using a routing protocol and therefore >the > > below would not apply to the scenario. > > As for running SOP on the server IMHO it would be overkill for this >specific > > situation. "Keep it simple." > > Would I run SOP on a server? > > Depends on why I had the server built in the first place. Have a nice >day! > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Jeffrey Reed" > > To: > > Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 8:27 AM > > Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > I just talked to someone yesterday who said they are running OSPF on the > > > WIN2000 servers and using dual NICs effectively. Is this a better way to > > > dual home servers? > > > > > > Jeffrey Reed > > > Classic Networking, Inc. > > > > > > -----Original Message- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > Galo > > > Villacis > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 7:18 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > I believe your issue may relate to the single IP stack on 2000. Try > > > defaulting traffic to the internet and adding a static route to the > > internal > > > network opposed to specifying the gateway on the internal IP interface. > > > Also I would go as far as disabling any NETBIOS on the external >interface > > > for security. > > > > > > cmd would be: > > > > > > route add -p Network Mask Gateway > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "Henrique Duarte" > > > To: > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 5:48 PM > > > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > > > Bulent, > > > > > > > > Thank you for the reply. I am afraid you may have misunderstood this > > > > problem. Allow me to be more clear: > > > > > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.150 - Host A - >128.59.39.3 > > > > | (dual > > > homed > > > > server) > > > > | > > > > | > > > > | > > > > | > > > > | > > > > 128.59.39.2 > > > > router A >router > > > > C Internet > > > > | > > > > 192.168.1.1 > > > > | > > > > | > > > >T1 > > > > | > > > > | > > > > 192.168.1.2 > > > > | > > > > router B > > > > | > > > > 192.168.2.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > The problem happens on Host A. Host A is a WebServer with 2 > > interfaces: > > > a > > > > public (which goes out to the internet) and a private (which talks to > > the > > > > database). The private interface has IP 192.168.0.150 and default GW > > > > 192.168.0.1. The public has ip 128.59.39.3 and default GW >128.59.39.2. > > > > Everything works fine if I leave the private interface's default GW > > blank. > > > > If I put Router C's address as the private interface's default >gateway, > > > > after some time I cannot ping anywhere from Host A, even though I can > > ping > > > > it from the outside world. I need to have the private interface > > > configured > > > > with 192.168.0.1 as the default GW because remote users need to be >able > > to > > > > connect to that server via the back-end T1. Any light would be >greatly > > > > appreciated. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > -H > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: "B|lent ^ahin" > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 3:17 AM > > > > Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > >
RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677]
Priscilla, That's not very lady like ;-) Just kidding too :-) Rah -Original Message- From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 May 2002 17:58 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] At 12:35 PM 5/10/02, Maximus wrote: >Sorry list members, the spell-checker changed OSPF to SOP. I think OSPF should be SOB. Just kidding! :-) Priscilla >- Original Message - >From: "Maximus" >To: >Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 12:40 PM >Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > I may be wrong but your friend is using a routing protocol and therefore >the > > below would not apply to the scenario. > > As for running SOP on the server IMHO it would be overkill for this >specific > > situation. "Keep it simple." > > Would I run SOP on a server? > > Depends on why I had the server built in the first place. Have a nice >day! > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Jeffrey Reed" > > To: > > Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 8:27 AM > > Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > I just talked to someone yesterday who said they are running OSPF on the > > > WIN2000 servers and using dual NICs effectively. Is this a better way to > > > dual home servers? > > > > > > Jeffrey Reed > > > Classic Networking, Inc. > > > > > > -----Original Message- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > Galo > > > Villacis > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 7:18 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > I believe your issue may relate to the single IP stack on 2000. Try > > > defaulting traffic to the internet and adding a static route to the > > internal > > > network opposed to specifying the gateway on the internal IP interface. > > > Also I would go as far as disabling any NETBIOS on the external >interface > > > for security. > > > > > > cmd would be: > > > > > > route add -p Network Mask Gateway > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "Henrique Duarte" > > > To: > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 5:48 PM > > > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > > > Bulent, > > > > > > > > Thank you for the reply. I am afraid you may have misunderstood this > > > > problem. Allow me to be more clear: > > > > > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.150 - Host A - >128.59.39.3 > > > > | (dual > > > homed > > > > server) > > > > | > > > > | > > > > | > > > > | > > > > | > > > > 128.59.39.2 > > > > router A >router > > > > C Internet > > > > | > > > > 192.168.1.1 > > > > | > > > > | > > > >T1 > > > > | > > > > | > > > > 192.168.1.2 > > > > | > > > > router B > > > > | > > > > 192.168.2.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > The problem happens on Host A. Host A is a WebServer with 2 > > interfaces: > > > a > > > > public (which goes out to the internet) and a private (which talks to > > the > > > > database). The private interface has IP 192.168.0.150 and default GW > > > > 192.168.0.1. The public has ip 128.59.39.3 and default GW >128.59.39.2. > > > > Everything works fine if I leave the private interface's default GW > > blank. > > > > If I put Router C's address as the private interface's default >gateway, > > > > after some time I cannot ping anywhere from Host A, even though I can > > ping > > > > it from the outside world. I need to have the private interface > > > configured > > > > with 192.168.0.1 as the default GW because remote users need to be >able > > to > > > > connect to that server via the back-end T1. Any light would be >greatly > > > > appreciated. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > -H > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Me
RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677]
Sob as in cry! OSPF makes me cry. ;-) At 07:15 PM 5/10/02, Rah Hussain wrote: >Priscilla, >That's not very lady like ;-) Just kidding too :-) > >Rah > >-Original Message- >From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: 10 May 2002 17:58 >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > >At 12:35 PM 5/10/02, Maximus wrote: > >Sorry list members, the spell-checker changed OSPF to SOP. > >I think OSPF should be SOB. Just kidding! :-) > >Priscilla > > > >- Original Message - > >From: "Maximus" > >To: > >Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 12:40 PM > >Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > I may be wrong but your friend is using a routing protocol and therefore > >the > > > below would not apply to the scenario. > > > As for running SOP on the server IMHO it would be overkill for this > >specific > > > situation. "Keep it simple." > > > Would I run SOP on a server? > > > Depends on why I had the server built in the first place. Have a nice > >day! > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "Jeffrey Reed" > > > To: > > > Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 8:27 AM > > > Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > > > I just talked to someone yesterday who said they are running OSPF on >the > > > > WIN2000 servers and using dual NICs effectively. Is this a better way >to > > > > dual home servers? > > > > > > > > Jeffrey Reed > > > > Classic Networking, Inc. > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > > Galo > > > > Villacis > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 7:18 PM > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > I believe your issue may relate to the single IP stack on 2000. Try > > > > defaulting traffic to the internet and adding a static route to the > > > internal > > > > network opposed to specifying the gateway on the internal IP >interface. > > > > Also I would go as far as disabling any NETBIOS on the external > >interface > > > > for security. > > > > > > > > cmd would be: > > > > > > > > route add -p Network Mask Gateway > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: "Henrique Duarte" > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 5:48 PM > > > > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bulent, > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for the reply. I am afraid you may have misunderstood >this > > > > > problem. Allow me to be more clear: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.150 - Host A - > >128.59.39.3 > > > > > | >(dual > > > > homed > > > > > server) > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > 128.59.39.2 > > > > > router A > >router > > > > > C Internet > > > > > | > > > > > 192.168.1.1 > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > >T1 > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > 192.168.1.2 > > > > > | > > > > > router B > > > > > | > > > > > 192.168.2.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The problem happens on Host A. Host A is a WebServer with 2 > > > interfaces: > > > > a > > > > > public (which goes out to the internet) and a private (which talks >to > > > the > > > > > database). The private interface has IP 192.168.0.150 and default >GW > > > > > 192.168.0.1. The public has ip 128.59.39.3 and default GW > >128.59.39.2. > > > > > Everything works fine if I leave the private interface's default GW > > > blank. > > > > > If I put Router C's address as the private interface'
RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677]
Oh I see hehehe Rah -Original Message- From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 May 2002 19:43 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] Sob as in cry! OSPF makes me cry. ;-) At 07:15 PM 5/10/02, Rah Hussain wrote: >Priscilla, >That's not very lady like ;-) Just kidding too :-) > >Rah > >-Original Message- >From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: 10 May 2002 17:58 >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > >At 12:35 PM 5/10/02, Maximus wrote: > >Sorry list members, the spell-checker changed OSPF to SOP. > >I think OSPF should be SOB. Just kidding! :-) > >Priscilla > > > >- Original Message - > >From: "Maximus" > >To: > >Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 12:40 PM > >Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > I may be wrong but your friend is using a routing protocol and therefore > >the > > > below would not apply to the scenario. > > > As for running SOP on the server IMHO it would be overkill for this > >specific > > > situation. "Keep it simple." > > > Would I run SOP on a server? > > > Depends on why I had the server built in the first place. Have a nice > >day! > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "Jeffrey Reed" > > > To: > > > Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 8:27 AM > > > Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > > > I just talked to someone yesterday who said they are running OSPF on >the > > > > WIN2000 servers and using dual NICs effectively. Is this a better way >to > > > > dual home servers? > > > > > > > > Jeffrey Reed > > > > Classic Networking, Inc. > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > > Galo > > > > Villacis > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 7:18 PM > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > I believe your issue may relate to the single IP stack on 2000. Try > > > > defaulting traffic to the internet and adding a static route to the > > > internal > > > > network opposed to specifying the gateway on the internal IP >interface. > > > > Also I would go as far as disabling any NETBIOS on the external > >interface > > > > for security. > > > > > > > > cmd would be: > > > > > > > > route add -p Network Mask Gateway > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: "Henrique Duarte" > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 5:48 PM > > > > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bulent, > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for the reply. I am afraid you may have misunderstood >this > > > > > problem. Allow me to be more clear: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.150 - Host A - > >128.59.39.3 > > > > > | >(dual > > > > homed > > > > > server) > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > 128.59.39.2 > > > > > router A > >router > > > > > C Internet > > > > > | > > > > > 192.168.1.1 > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > >T1 > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > 192.168.1.2 > > > > > | > > > > > router B > > > > > | > > > > > 192.168.2.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The problem happens on Host A. Host A is a WebServer with 2 > > > interfaces: > > > > a > > > > > public (which goes out to the internet) and a private (which talks >to > > > the > > > > > database). The private interface has IP 192.168.0.150 and default >GW > > > > > 192.168.0.1. The public has ip 128.59.39.3 and default GW > >128.59.39.2. > >
RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677]
LOL. OSPF is a wonderful thing, remember that life has a funny way of punishing those who can't recognize its little gifts, you could be working with IS-IS . -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Priscilla Oppenheimer Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 1:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] Sob as in cry! OSPF makes me cry. ;-) At 07:15 PM 5/10/02, Rah Hussain wrote: >Priscilla, >That's not very lady like ;-) Just kidding too :-) > >Rah > >-Original Message- >From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: 10 May 2002 17:58 >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > >At 12:35 PM 5/10/02, Maximus wrote: > >Sorry list members, the spell-checker changed OSPF to SOP. > >I think OSPF should be SOB. Just kidding! :-) > >Priscilla > > > >- Original Message - > >From: "Maximus" > >To: > >Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 12:40 PM > >Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > I may be wrong but your friend is using a routing protocol and therefore > >the > > > below would not apply to the scenario. > > > As for running SOP on the server IMHO it would be overkill for this > >specific > > > situation. "Keep it simple." > > > Would I run SOP on a server? > > > Depends on why I had the server built in the first place. Have a nice > >day! > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "Jeffrey Reed" > > > To: > > > Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 8:27 AM > > > Subject: RE: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > > > I just talked to someone yesterday who said they are running OSPF on >the > > > > WIN2000 servers and using dual NICs effectively. Is this a better way >to > > > > dual home servers? > > > > > > > > Jeffrey Reed > > > > Classic Networking, Inc. > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > > Galo > > > > Villacis > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 7:18 PM > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > I believe your issue may relate to the single IP stack on 2000. Try > > > > defaulting traffic to the internet and adding a static route to the > > > internal > > > > network opposed to specifying the gateway on the internal IP >interface. > > > > Also I would go as far as disabling any NETBIOS on the external > >interface > > > > for security. > > > > > > > > cmd would be: > > > > > > > > route add -p Network Mask Gateway > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: "Henrique Duarte" > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 5:48 PM > > > > Subject: Re: dual-homed hosts problems [7:43677] > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bulent, > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for the reply. I am afraid you may have misunderstood >this > > > > > problem. Allow me to be more clear: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.150 - Host A - > >128.59.39.3 > > > > > | >(dual > > > > homed > > > > > server) > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > 128.59.39.2 > > > > > router A > >router > > > > > C Internet > > > > > | > > > > > 192.168.1.1 > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > >T1 > > > > > | > > > > > | > > > > > 192.168.1.2 > > > > > | > > > > > router B > > > > > | > > > > > 192.168.2.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The problem happens on Host A. Host A is a WebServer with 2 > > > interfaces: > > > > a > > > > > public (which goes out to the internet) and a private (which talks >to > > > the > > > > > databa
