Re: Can't set default route
On Sun, May 07, 2000 at 06:56:36PM +, Paul Delaney wrote: > I have two PC's networked, both machines can ping each other, but I cannot > get a working default route set on PC2. > > PC1: TNOS 44.16.2.46 > LINUX 44.16.2.48 > ETH0 192.168.0.1 > > PC2: ETH0 44.16.2.58 Why use an ampr.org address for an ethernet port? You need to have a consistent subnet going there on your LAN... use 192.168.0.x addresses for every ethernet port on every machine. If PC2 has no radio ports then its 44.x address is purely virtual... probably is going to involve BPQ or something no? and that interface would probably have its own 44.x address even though the actual IP connection to the other machine occurs on 192.168.0.x. You should also consider ditching TNOS to simplify your life. The kernel AX.25 stuff is working quite well these days. I use 2.2.14, so I can help if you run into any problems trying to do it with a modern kernel. -- ___ Shawn T. Rutledge / KB7PWD [EMAIL PROTECTED] (_ | |_) http://www.bigfoot.com/~ecloud [EMAIL PROTECTED] __) | | \ Get money for spare CPU cycles at http://www.ProcessTree.com/?sponsor=5903
Re: Can't set default route
On Sun, 07 May 2000, Paul Delaney wrote about, Can't set default route: > Hello All, > > I have two PC's networked, both machines can ping each other, but I cannot > get a working default route set on PC2. > > PC1: TNOS 44.16.2.46 > LINUX 44.16.2.48 > ETH0 192.168.0.1 > > PC2: ETH0 44.16.2.58 Not wishing to be rude but why 2 pc's, not to mention "why" tnos as a nessasary front end for the internet. I can ping via ampr.org 44.16.2.46 but no iother address of yours. You have not included any configuration files or any error messages so really trying to give any more help would be more missleading than "guessing". > I am running RH 6.2 on PC2. The TNOS address above is my link to the > Internet. So I need PC2 to have TNOS as the default gateway. I have set > the default route in PC2 (network config) but it does not work. I have > also tried using the 44.16.2.48 address as the default but no joy. > However, using 44.16.2.48 as the DNS works fine. > > I'm stumped and don't know where to go from here! Help! Possably publishing your config files migt help us help you, or if you dont want to publish them openly you could send then to me in a personal, i will then try and help in confidance. Or i could be missing the whole point here. > Paul Delaney > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > kb2shu@kb2shu.#sca.ca.usa.noam > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.moonlink.net/~paul -- Regards Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.zeelandnet.nl/pa3gcu/
Re: Can't set default route
On Sun, 7 May 2000, Paul Delaney wrote: > > Hello All, > > I have two PC's networked, both machines can ping each other, but I cannot > get a working default route set on PC2. > > PC1: TNOS 44.16.2.46 > LINUX 44.16.2.48 > ETH0 192.168.0.1 > > PC2: ETH0 44.16.2.58 > > I am running RH 6.2 on PC2. The TNOS address above is my link to the > Internet. So I need PC2 to have TNOS as the default gateway. I have set > the default route in PC2 (network config) but it does not work. I have > also tried using the 44.16.2.48 address as the default but no joy. > However, using 44.16.2.48 as the DNS works fine. > > I'm stumped and don't know where to go from here! Help! > > Paul Delaney > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > kb2shu@kb2shu.#sca.ca.usa.noam > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.moonlink.net/~paul > > Hi Paul, your PC2 probably expects to find it's subnet routing partner on the eth0 interface. Your TNOS (default router in this case) is hidden from the eth0 interface. I use proxy arp here for just that situation. I forget the actual arp command at the moment, but do an arp for both your pc1 linux and your tnos, using the eth0 hardware address for both linux and tnos. Be sure you have proper routing in place, and it should find your tnos. ... ok, found my arp commands (using 2.0.36/libc so your command might be a little different with the RH 6.1). Here's mine from rc.local: /sbin/arp -s 44.46.97.3 00:40:95:E1:14:78 pub #linux /sbin/arp -s 44.46.97.1 00:40:95:E1:14:78 pub #jnos -- 73, Ronnie. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can't set default route
Hello All, I have two PC's networked, both machines can ping each other, but I cannot get a working default route set on PC2. PC1: TNOS 44.16.2.46 LINUX 44.16.2.48 ETH0 192.168.0.1 PC2: ETH0 44.16.2.58 I am running RH 6.2 on PC2. The TNOS address above is my link to the Internet. So I need PC2 to have TNOS as the default gateway. I have set the default route in PC2 (network config) but it does not work. I have also tried using the 44.16.2.48 address as the default but no joy. However, using 44.16.2.48 as the DNS works fine. I'm stumped and don't know where to go from here! Help! Paul Delaney [EMAIL PROTECTED] kb2shu@kb2shu.#sca.ca.usa.noam [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.moonlink.net/~paul
Re: Route
On Mon, 29 Nov 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I need help to lock a route in net/rom. Sk7hw is heard on my port1 but i > cant connect this way. My connectway is on port2 via sk7bk-5. How can i lock > the port so that the connection goes the right way? I have tryed nrparms > -nodes sk7hw-5 - vxo 50 5 port1 to remove it from the list. When sk7hw sends > out nodeinfo it comes back. How? You can not lock a node in Linux. What you can do is lock a route (a neighbour). If you lock the quality of that particular neighbour (sk7hw on port1) to a low value, the node routes it advertises won't be used except as a last resort. Locking a route is of course done with "nrparms -route". However if there are also no other "good" neighbours on your port1 frequency it might be a better idea to lower the default quality for that port in /etc/ax25/nrbroadcast. The effect will be the same but it will by default affect all neighbours on that port. -- --- Tomi Manninen / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / OH2BNS @ OH2RBI.FIN.EU ---
Route
Hi every one! I need help to lock a route in net/rom. Sk7hw is heard on my port1 but i cant connect this way. My connectway is on port2 via sk7bk-5. How can i lock the port so that the connection goes the right way? I have tryed nrparms -nodes sk7hw-5 - vxo 50 5 port1 to remove it from the list. When sk7hw sends out nodeinfo it comes back. How? SM7TIX
Re: Arp problem? No route to host!
In article <037801bef440$b92d7180$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Mark Haworth") writes:
> of the arp table itself). My older kernels (2.0.35) did have these entries
> and they worked fine. I've checked the older SuSE 6.1 with 2.2.5 and
> they're not there either.
I don't actually use a 2.2.x kernel for AX.25 but as nobody else seems
to have responded I seem to recall from something I needed them for at
work that the /proc/sys pseudo files are now a kernel build option.
Dave
Re: Arp problem? No route to host!
> I have another problem with linux and ax25, another member of the >list have it too. This is when i ftp or telnet to x.x.x.x host it sent 3 arp >request in 2 second and return (no route to host).How can i increase the >time that ARP request must wait for the reply?? 2 seconds is too short!! The >IRTT on the route doesn't to care...If the ARP Req was replyed in 2 second >it work ok... >I'm using linux 2.2.10 and ax25 utils 2.1.42, and soundmodem 1200... I too am suffering the same. There have been several suggestions, mainly around the arp_ entries in the /proc/sys/net/ipv4 directory. Sadly on my 2.2.10 (SuSE) with libax25 (0.0.7), tools (0.0.5) and apps (0.0.4), there are no arp entries anywhere under /proc (besides a copy of the arp table itself). My older kernels (2.0.35) did have these entries and they worked fine. I've checked the older SuSE 6.1 with 2.2.5 and they're not there either. Does anyone have any suggestions as to if it's something I've done or are they not there in 2.2 even though the linux/net/Documentation says they should be. I've tried echoing values to create the entries, but no joy Any ideas? Mark G4EID (Sysop GB7WLR), amprnet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] NTS: G4EID@GB7WLR.#16.GBR.EU internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ARP problem? no route to host!
On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, ariel mastracchio wrote: > Hi all! > >I have another problem with linux and ax25, another member of the > list have it too. This is when i ftp or telnet to x.x.x.x host it sent 3 arp > request in 2 second and return (no route to host).How can i increase the > time that ARP request must wait for the reply?? 2 seconds is too short!! The > IRTT on the route doesn't to care...If the ARP Req was replyed in 2 second > it work ok... > > I'm using linux 2.2.10 and ax25 utils 2.1.42, and soundmodem 1200... > > Thanks in advance... Hi Ariel, Here is an excerpt from a previous post regarding ARP timing from Julian Munoz Dominguez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Subject: Re: ARP time too short > So, is there any solution to slow down the ARP requests ? Yes, there is. Take a look of that, for 1200 bauds: The meaning of /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ is explained (but no very well) in Linux kernel source documentation (wich comes with Linux kernel sources) # Parametros arp # Maximo 7 arps /bin/echo "7" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/arp_max_tries # Los arp quedan 1 hora en memoria /bin/echo "36" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/arp_timeout # Los arps requests se hacen cada 15 segundos (---> ARPS requests every 15S ) /bin/echo "1500" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/arp_res_time # Se comprueba aproximadamente cada 3500 segundos. /bin/echo "35" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/arp_check_interval -.- -- 73, Ronnie. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ARP problem? no route to host!
Hi all! I have another problem with linux and ax25, another member of the list have it too. This is when i ftp or telnet to x.x.x.x host it sent 3 arp request in 2 second and return (no route to host).How can i increase the time that ARP request must wait for the reply?? 2 seconds is too short!! The IRTT on the route doesn't to care...If the ARP Req was replyed in 2 second it work ok... I'm using linux 2.2.10 and ax25 utils 2.1.42, and soundmodem 1200... Thanks in advance... - Saludos, Ariel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: No route to host -- first attempt. Second time works.
Hey, thanks! That fixed it. Richard Adams wrote: > > > > > I'm running axutils under Redhat 6.0, and things seem to be basically working. >(Though I > > don't use any Netrom stuff.) > > > > Here's a slight oddity though. When I type 'telnet w6yx.ampr.org' which is 1 hop >away > > from here, the very first time, I"ll get 'no route to host' for the ip adress, >which is > > correctly resolved. Then, right away, I'll 'telnet w6yx.ampr.org' again, and it >works > > fine. I get in no problem. How do I go about diagnosing this -- or figuring out >what's > > happening. Here's the setup for the soundmodem. Also, right now I'm not really >sure what > > 'window' and 'irtt' do -- and I just guessed at sensible numbers. > > > > /usr/sbin/sethdlc -p -i sm0 mode sbc:afsk1200 io 0x220 irq 5 dma 1 pario 0x378 > > /usr/sbin/sethdlc -i sm0 -a txd 200 slot 50 ppersist 128 half > > /sbin/ifconfig sm0 hw ax25 KE6I-1 up > > /sbin/ifconfig sm0 44.4.28.50 netmask 255.255.255.0 up > > /sbin/ifconfig sm0 broadcast 44.4.255.255 mtu 512 > > /sbin/route add -net 44.4.0.0 netmask 255.255.240.0 window 128 irtt 2000 dev sm0 > > /sbin/route add -net 44.4.0.196 window 128 irtt 2000 dev sm0 > > /sbin/route add -net 44.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0 gw 44.4.0.196 > > > > The routing above is very confusing, w6yx.ampr.org = 44.4.0.196 so he is a > "host" not a "net" > > route add 44.4.0.196 window 128 irtt 2000 dev sm0 > would be more applicable i think. (See comment on wondowsize below) > > You attach a route for 44.0.0.0 via sm0 as the first route, however after > adding the bogus route to 44.4.0.196 you add a default route for 44.0.0.0 > again but now via 44.4.0.196 who at firstsight is a "net". > > I would do the following. > > ifconfig sm0 down # clears routing. > ifconfig sm0 up# should use the old configured address etc. > ifconfig sm0 braodcast 44.255.255.255 > route add 44.4.0.196 window 128 irtt 2000 dev sm0 > route add -net 44.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0 gw 44.4.0.196 sm0 > > On another note you define a MTU of 512 which carries 472 bytes of data, > you then configure a window size of 128 which is incompatable, a beter size > would be 944 which is 2 packts every transmission. > > If you are worried about transmitting and receiving Too large packets, then > lower the MTU to 256 and set the window size to 216 thats one packet. > > Now i hope i got my sums right. > > -- > Regards Richard. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://junglevision.com
Re: No route to host -- first attempt. Second time works.
> > I'm running axutils under Redhat 6.0, and things seem to be basically working. >(Though I > don't use any Netrom stuff.) > > Here's a slight oddity though. When I type 'telnet w6yx.ampr.org' which is 1 hop >away > from here, the very first time, I"ll get 'no route to host' for the ip adress, which >is > correctly resolved. Then, right away, I'll 'telnet w6yx.ampr.org' again, and it >works > fine. I get in no problem. How do I go about diagnosing this -- or figuring out >what's > happening. Here's the setup for the soundmodem. Also, right now I'm not really >sure what > 'window' and 'irtt' do -- and I just guessed at sensible numbers. > > /usr/sbin/sethdlc -p -i sm0 mode sbc:afsk1200 io 0x220 irq 5 dma 1 pario 0x378 > /usr/sbin/sethdlc -i sm0 -a txd 200 slot 50 ppersist 128 half > /sbin/ifconfig sm0 hw ax25 KE6I-1 up > /sbin/ifconfig sm0 44.4.28.50 netmask 255.255.255.0 up > /sbin/ifconfig sm0 broadcast 44.4.255.255 mtu 512 > /sbin/route add -net 44.4.0.0 netmask 255.255.240.0 window 128 irtt 2000 dev sm0 > /sbin/route add -net 44.4.0.196 window 128 irtt 2000 dev sm0 > /sbin/route add -net 44.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0 gw 44.4.0.196 > The routing above is very confusing, w6yx.ampr.org = 44.4.0.196 so he is a "host" not a "net" route add 44.4.0.196 window 128 irtt 2000 dev sm0 would be more applicable i think. (See comment on wondowsize below) You attach a route for 44.0.0.0 via sm0 as the first route, however after adding the bogus route to 44.4.0.196 you add a default route for 44.0.0.0 again but now via 44.4.0.196 who at firstsight is a "net". I would do the following. ifconfig sm0 down # clears routing. ifconfig sm0 up# should use the old configured address etc. ifconfig sm0 braodcast 44.255.255.255 route add 44.4.0.196 window 128 irtt 2000 dev sm0 route add -net 44.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0 gw 44.4.0.196 sm0 On another note you define a MTU of 512 which carries 472 bytes of data, you then configure a window size of 128 which is incompatable, a beter size would be 944 which is 2 packts every transmission. If you are worried about transmitting and receiving Too large packets, then lower the MTU to 256 and set the window size to 216 thats one packet. Now i hope i got my sums right. -- Regards Richard. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No route to host -- first attempt. Second time works.
I'm running axutils under Redhat 6.0, and things seem to be basically working. (Though I don't use any Netrom stuff.) Here's a slight oddity though. When I type 'telnet w6yx.ampr.org' which is 1 hop away from here, the very first time, I"ll get 'no route to host' for the ip adress, which is correctly resolved. Then, right away, I'll 'telnet w6yx.ampr.org' again, and it works fine. I get in no problem. How do I go about diagnosing this -- or figuring out what's happening. Here's the setup for the soundmodem. Also, right now I'm not really sure what 'window' and 'irtt' do -- and I just guessed at sensible numbers. /usr/sbin/sethdlc -p -i sm0 mode sbc:afsk1200 io 0x220 irq 5 dma 1 pario 0x378 /usr/sbin/sethdlc -i sm0 -a txd 200 slot 50 ppersist 128 half /sbin/ifconfig sm0 hw ax25 KE6I-1 up /sbin/ifconfig sm0 44.4.28.50 netmask 255.255.255.0 up /sbin/ifconfig sm0 broadcast 44.4.255.255 mtu 512 /sbin/route add -net 44.4.0.0 netmask 255.255.240.0 window 128 irtt 2000 dev sm0 /sbin/route add -net 44.4.0.196 window 128 irtt 2000 dev sm0 /sbin/route add -net 44.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0 gw 44.4.0.196
Re: Problem with NET/ROM route settings
Hi Gerd. >>> nrparms -nodes radio >> Err??? That command shouldn't work in any circumstances. Are you >> sure you typed right? You can see the correct parameters from "man >> nrparms" or even simply "nrparms -nodes". > I am awfully sorry , as this was one of my terrible typos. The > correct way (as we used it, of course) was something like > /usr/sbin/nrparms -nodes VK2XLZ-10 + #MINTO 120 5 radio VK2SUT-9 ^ > (pasted from the HOWTO by now) Watch out for that character - most shells treat that as indicating the start of a comment to be ignored, and strip it and everything following from the line before handing it over to the program... I can't help with the rest of your query as I don't know the software in question, and the above comment may not be relevant, but just in case it is... Best wishes from Riley GM7GOD / KB8PPG. --- * ftp://ftp.Amush.cx/pub/rhw/Linux * http://www.Amush.cx/~rhw/kernel.versions.html
Re: Problem with NET/ROM route settings
Hello Tomi, > > An example: > > > > nrparms -nodes radio > > Err??? That command shouldn't work in any circumstances. Are you sure you > typed right? You can see the correct parameters from "man nrparms" or even > simply "nrparms -nodes". I am awfully sorry , as this was one of my terrible typos. The correct way (as we used it, of course) was something like /usr/sbin/nrparms -nodes VK2XLZ-10 + #MINTO 120 5 radio VK2SUT-9 (pasted from the HOWTO by now) > > > should set up the NET/ROM subsystem in a way that a > > > > cat /proc/net/nr_nodes > > > > shows an entry with VK2XLZ-10 in it. But sometimes, this entry is > > missing, allthough the nrparms command seemed to be processed > > without an error. > > Whose call is that VK2XLZ-10? Yours? Or is it a neighbouring node? Or a > distant node? It is only the example from the HOWTO. Hoping to be more clearly I'll try to explain it some other way: We have the Linux box with FBB, let's say with the callsign LI0BBS. Forwarding is done via NET/ROM via a neighbouring node (no other nodes between it) to another BBS, let's say DO0BBS. Here's a little drawing of that all: ++ +--+ | LI0BBS| NET/ROM Link |NO0NOD| ++ |(NET/ROM node)| +--+---+ | NET/ROM Link | +--+ | DO0BBS | |(Forward | | partner) | +--+ All we want is that the route to DO0BBS via NO0NOD is already set after booting our Linux Box. Because we don't want to set the broadcasts to be sent a dozen times every minute waiting for a node broadcast to be received is not acceptable for us. Instead, node broadcasts are turned off to avoid wasting bandwidth here. so it is _necessary_ to have the routes available without having to wait for _any_ broadcast! > > I'm a bit lost as to what you are trying to do. For a basic setup you > should only need to start netromd and let it do it's work - broadcasting > your routes and collecting routing info from broadcasts from other nodes. > > Later you can use nodesave to save your routing congiguration, edit it to > contain only the most important ones and then use that script at boot to > quickly restore them. Or like on our BBS where I dump the routes with > "nodesave" to a file every half hours from cron so in case the system > crashes or needs to be shut down, I always have a fresh copy to load at > boot. That's a really good idea. We will go ahead with nodesave, hopefully it does this job for us, too. > > > Does it take the NET/ROM subsystem a longer time to initialize > > than we expect? If not, what other reason is possible for this > > behaviour of NET/ROM? > > Well one thing is that if you don't use "-i" option for netromd, it won't > start sending node broadcasts until after some time (interval time, > default 60mins). A good thing to know. But as mentioned before, broadcasts are disabled here, so we have to find a good workaround. Dear Tomi, thank you very much for these hints! Best regards, 73 Gerd
Re: Problem with NET/ROM route settings
On Mon, 15 Feb 1999, Gerd wrote: > When we boot up our Linux Box, we set the NET/ROM routes that > are necessary to have up for us, eg. for FBB forwarding, using the > nrparms command as described in the AX.25-HOWTO. > Unfortunately, the NET/ROM part of the kernel seems to have > difficulties to recognize these routes. > > An example: > > nrparms -nodes radio Err??? That command shouldn't work in any circumstances. Are you sure you typed right? You can see the correct parameters from "man nrparms" or even simply "nrparms -nodes". > should set up the NET/ROM subsystem in a way that a > > cat /proc/net/nr_nodes > > shows an entry with VK2XLZ-10 in it. But sometimes, this entry is > missing, allthough the nrparms command seemed to be processed > without an error. Whose call is that VK2XLZ-10? Yours? Or is it a neighbouring node? Or a distant node? > We actually have the NET/ROM routes setup in our Packet Radio > initialization script that runs at boot time, after setting and > initializing the NET/ROM ports and loading netromd, of course. In > most cases the correct route entries are achieved if we enter the > nrparms commands manually after a console login. I'm a bit lost as to what you are trying to do. For a basic setup you should only need to start netromd and let it do it's work - broadcasting your routes and collecting routing info from broadcasts from other nodes. Later you can use nodesave to save your routing congiguration, edit it to contain only the most important ones and then use that script at boot to quickly restore them. Or like on our BBS where I dump the routes with "nodesave" to a file every half hours from cron so in case the system crashes or needs to be shut down, I always have a fresh copy to load at boot. > Does it take the NET/ROM subsystem a longer time to initialize > than we expect? If not, what other reason is possible for this > behaviour of NET/ROM? Well one thing is that if you don't use "-i" option for netromd, it won't start sending node broadcasts until after some time (interval time, default 60mins). > The background for asking you this is that we want to have this box > running without any user or root intervention to be necessary for > running the AX.25 services. Well that's the only correct way! -- --... Tomi Manninen / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / OH2BNS @ OH2RBI.FIN.EU ...--
Problem with NET/ROM route settings
Hello, after a little break, I am back again to this list. We finally managed to get Linux (Kernel 2.0.36) and xfbbd up and running. Besides a small problem with xfbbd (seems there is trouble in its communcation with the kernel sockets, sometimes) that I put an inquiry for solution for in the xfbb mailing list, NET/ROM gives us some headaches. When we boot up our Linux Box, we set the NET/ROM routes that are necessary to have up for us, eg. for FBB forwarding, using the nrparms command as described in the AX.25-HOWTO. Unfortunately, the NET/ROM part of the kernel seems to have difficulties to recognize these routes. An example: nrparms -nodes radio should set up the NET/ROM subsystem in a way that a cat /proc/net/nr_nodes shows an entry with VK2XLZ-10 in it. But sometimes, this entry is missing, allthough the nrparms command seemed to be processed without an error. We actually have the NET/ROM routes setup in our Packet Radio initialization script that runs at boot time, after setting and initializing the NET/ROM ports and loading netromd, of course. In most cases the correct route entries are achieved if we enter the nrparms commands manually after a console login. Does it take the NET/ROM subsystem a longer time to initialize than we expect? If not, what other reason is possible for this behaviour of NET/ROM? The background for asking you this is that we want to have this box running without any user or root intervention to be necessary for running the AX.25 services. Thank you for any hint in advance! Best regards, 73 Gerd
Re: ip-ip route config
On Wed, 17 Nov 1999, Ricardo Denis wrote: > i need to configure an ip-ip route. i issue : > > route add -net 44.163.64.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw tunl0 206.48.104.7 maybe the command line should be: route add -net 44.163.64.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 206.48.104.7 tunl0 -- 73 DE BG6CQ URL: http://www.ustc.edu.cn/~james Zhang Huanjie E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Center, University of Science and Technology of China No. 96, JinZhai Road, Hefei, Anhui 230026, P.R.China
Re: ip-ip route config
On Wed, Nov 17, 1999 at 08:08:07PM -2600, Ricardo Denis wrote: > greetings, > > i need to configure an ip-ip route. i issue : > > route add -net 44.163.64.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw tunl0 206.48.104.7 > > but i get the error message : > > tunl0: Unknown host > > what am i doing wrong here? thanks for any help. Put the destination after gw, then the interface: route add -net 44.163.64.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 206.48.104.7 tunl0 Bob, w6swe -- Bob Nielsen Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tucson, AZ AMPRnet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DM42nh http://www.primenet.com/~nielsen
ip-ip route config
greetings, i need to configure an ip-ip route. i issue : route add -net 44.163.64.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw tunl0 206.48.104.7 but i get the error message : tunl0: Unknown host what am i doing wrong here? thanks for any help. 73 de rick, hr2kos
Axip doesn't route right....
where does the ax25ipd get info from to route ax25 calls to it ? It only works with the default route right now. The problem is that I have two gates to route from here, but it only wants one at a time. I know there's a simple fix, but I must be missing it here. This is from the ax25ipd.conf file.... route W4BKX-5 44.98.2.5 bd #route KD4ZKW-1 44.98.2.22 b route AE4EJ-1 44.98.2.28 b Right now w4bkx works fine, but ae4ej doesn't. If I move the d flag to ae4ej, then it's the other way around. Any ideas ? Curtis D. Levin kd4zkw.ampr.org [44.98.2.22] [EMAIL PROTECTED] QRP-l #1488 http://dialisdn.net/user/cdlevin/
