[gentoo-user] two subnetworks
Hello, I have a computer with two interfaces: eth0 and eth1 /sbin/ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:02:B3:50:88:D3 inet addr:5.5.5.98 Bcast:5.5.5.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 ... eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:02:B3:50:88:D4 inet addr:192.168.1.12 Bcast:255.255.255.255 Mask:255.255.255.255 ... /sbin/route default * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth1 - I down't know what is this. 192.168.1.17 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.1.16 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.1.15 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth1 5.5.5.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 127.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo default 5.5.5.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward 0 My computer's ip is 5.5.5.2 with default gw 5.5.5.1 5.5.5.1 - cisco router Is it right to ping 192.168.1.12 from 5.5.5.2 ? I down't want to see 192.168.1.12 from 5.5.5.0 network. Sorry for my english. Thanks. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] two subnetworks
On Mon, 2003-10-20 at 09:48, Selentek 24331-03 wrote: default * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth1 - I down't know what is this. That is you default route. It is the route your PC uses to send traffic to your Cisco. Is it right to ping 192.168.1.12 from 5.5.5.2 ? If you are pinging from the PC that bridges the two netwroks, then yes you will be able to ping both networks. I down't want to see 192.168.1.12 from 5.5.5.0 network. I'm no expert on UNIX routing, but from the details you given I can see no reason why this is possible. Unless you have another PC that bridges these two networks. Sorry for my english. You're doing fine... Cheers Dg -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] two subnetworks
On 10:30 Mon 20 Oct , David Gethings wrote: On Mon, 2003-10-20 at 09:48, Selentek 24331-03 wrote: default * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth1 - I down't know what is this. That is you default route. It is the route your PC uses to send traffic to your Cisco. Is it right to ping 192.168.1.12 from 5.5.5.2 ? If you are pinging from the PC that bridges the two netwroks, then yes you will be able to ping both networks. I down't want to see 192.168.1.12 from 5.5.5.0 network. I'm no expert on UNIX routing, but from the details you given I can see no reason why this is possible. Unless you have another PC that bridges these two networks. Sorry for my english. You're doing fine... Cheers Dg -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list One more detail with tcpdump: sudo tcpdump -f -i eth0 icmp tcpdump: listening on eth0 13:50:21.969383 5.5.5.2 192.168.1.12: icmp: echo request 13:50:21.969436 192.168.1.12 5.5.5.2: icmp: echo reply -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] two subnetworks
On Mon, 2003-10-20 at 10:41, Selentek 24331-03 wrote: On 10:30 Mon 20 Oct , David Gethings wrote: On Mon, 2003-10-20 at 09:48, Selentek 24331-03 wrote: default * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth1 - I down't know what is this. That is you default route. It is the route your PC uses to send traffic to your Cisco. Sorry. My brain is full of flu. :( The above route could be the cause of your problem. One more detail with tcpdump: sudo tcpdump -f -i eth0 icmp tcpdump: listening on eth0 13:50:21.969383 5.5.5.2 192.168.1.12: icmp: echo request 13:50:21.969436 192.168.1.12 5.5.5.2: icmp: echo reply Apologies. When I re-read your email I understood your email better. Cheers Dg -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] two subnetworks
On Monday 20 October 2003 18:41, Selentek 24331-03 wrote: On 10:30 Mon 20 Oct , David Gethings wrote: On Mon, 2003-10-20 at 09:48, Selentek 24331-03 wrote: default * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth1 - I down't know what is this. That is you default route. It is the route your PC uses to send traffic to your Cisco. Is it right to ping 192.168.1.12 from 5.5.5.2 ? If you are pinging from the PC that bridges the two netwroks, then yes you will be able to ping both networks. I down't want to see 192.168.1.12 from 5.5.5.0 network. I'm no expert on UNIX routing, but from the details you given I can see no reason why this is possible. Unless you have another PC that bridges these two networks. Sorry for my english. You're doing fine... Cheers Dg -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list One more detail with tcpdump: sudo tcpdump -f -i eth0 icmp tcpdump: listening on eth0 13:50:21.969383 5.5.5.2 192.168.1.12: icmp: echo request 13:50:21.969436 192.168.1.12 5.5.5.2: icmp: echo reply What's the routing table on 5.5.5.2? If there's no static route to 192.168.1.0 via 192.168.1.12 and it's not the default gateway then 5.5.5.2 should not even send out an arp request. Is the device that is 5.5.5.2's default route aware of 192.168.1.12? If so, that could explain why 5.5.5.2 can ping 192.168.1.12 directly. Jason -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] two subnetworks
On 18:21 Mon 20 Oct , Jason Stubbs wrote: On Monday 20 October 2003 18:41, Selentek 24331-03 wrote: On 10:30 Mon 20 Oct , David Gethings wrote: On Mon, 2003-10-20 at 09:48, Selentek 24331-03 wrote: default * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth1 - I down't know what is this. That is you default route. It is the route your PC uses to send traffic to your Cisco. Is it right to ping 192.168.1.12 from 5.5.5.2 ? If you are pinging from the PC that bridges the two netwroks, then yes you will be able to ping both networks. I down't want to see 192.168.1.12 from 5.5.5.0 network. I'm no expert on UNIX routing, but from the details you given I can see no reason why this is possible. Unless you have another PC that bridges these two networks. Sorry for my english. You're doing fine... Cheers Dg -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list One more detail with tcpdump: sudo tcpdump -f -i eth0 icmp tcpdump: listening on eth0 13:50:21.969383 5.5.5.2 192.168.1.12: icmp: echo request 13:50:21.969436 192.168.1.12 5.5.5.2: icmp: echo reply What's the routing table on 5.5.5.2? If there's no static route to 192.168.1.0 via 192.168.1.12 and it's not the default gateway then 5.5.5.2 should not even send out an arp request. Is the device that is 5.5.5.2's default route aware of 192.168.1.12? If so, that could explain why 5.5.5.2 can ping 192.168.1.12 directly. Jason -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list route on 5.5.5.2 5.5.5.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 00 eth0 loopbacklocalhost 255.0.0.0 UG0 00 lo default 5.5.5.1 0.0.0.0 UG0 00 eth0 It's very strage for me. (Ping) Icmp packets to the interface eth1 (192.168.1.12) flying throw eth0 (5.5.5.98). Is it a normal situation and the solution is iptables ? or it's a unnormal situation? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] two subnetworks
On Monday 20 October 2003 19:19, Selentek 24331-03 wrote: On 18:21 Mon 20 Oct , Jason Stubbs wrote: On Monday 20 October 2003 18:41, Selentek 24331-03 wrote: One more detail with tcpdump: sudo tcpdump -f -i eth0 icmp tcpdump: listening on eth0 13:50:21.969383 5.5.5.2 192.168.1.12: icmp: echo request 13:50:21.969436 192.168.1.12 5.5.5.2: icmp: echo reply What's the routing table on 5.5.5.2? If there's no static route to 192.168.1.0 via 192.168.1.12 and it's not the default gateway then 5.5.5.2 should not even send out an arp request. Is the device that is 5.5.5.2's default route aware of 192.168.1.12? If so, that could explain why 5.5.5.2 can ping 192.168.1.12 directly. Jason route on 5.5.5.2 5.5.5.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 00 eth0 loopbacklocalhost 255.0.0.0 UG0 0 0 lo default 5.5.5.1 0.0.0.0 UG0 0 0 eth0 It's very strage for me. (Ping) Icmp packets to the interface eth1 (192.168.1.12) flying throw eth0 (5.5.5.98). Is it a normal situation and the solution is iptables ? or it's a unnormal situation? So 5.5.5.1 has no route to 192.168.1.12 at all? From all the info you have given I can't see why it can ping with no problems unless 5.5.5.98 is in fact advertising itself as also being 192.168.1.12. I would suggest running some sort of packet sniffing software to find out what's really going on. Jason -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
