Re: Linux Router
> "CN" == Carlos Narváez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: CN> - IP Forwarding has been enabled on the router via "echo 1 > CN> /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward" Try cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/*/forwarding. If any of them are 0, then echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/all/forwarding. /Benny - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" 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.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Linux Router
On Sep 22 2007 22:10, ben soo wrote: > > i used to add proxy arp's on the router when i had problems like this. Dunno > if it's the recommended fix, but it worked. There is certainly no Proxy ARP required here since you do not do subnet sharing or funny games like that. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_arp > > Carlos Narváez wrote: >> +---+ . ++ >> ¦ 192.168.251.1 +---+ 192.168.251.10 ¦ . ++ >> +---+ . ¦ 192.168.254.17 +---+ 192.168.254.16 ¦ >> . . . . . . . . . . ++ . ++ >> >> - A route has been configured on 192.168.251.1 to point all traffic >> for 192.168.254.0/24 to 192.168.251.10. >> >> - A route has been configured on 192.168.254.16 to point all traffic >> for 192.168.251.0/24 to 192.168.254.17. >> >> - The command "iptables -I FORWARD -j ACCEPT" has been executed. Well, and do the counters increase? >> Now.. here's what happens. 192.168.251.10 can ping both interfaces on >> the router. 192.168.254.16 can also ping both interfaces on the >> router. However, 192.168.251.1 cannot ping 192.168.254.16, and >> likewise, 192.168.254.16 cannot ping 192.168.251.1. >> >> What have I forgotten? Default GWs (though if you ahve routes, ok..). On 251.1, use `ip r g 192.168.254.16` and it should show "192.168.254.16 via 192.168.251.10 dev eth0 ...". Same on the other side. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" 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.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Linux Router
On Sep 22 2007 22:10, ben soo wrote: i used to add proxy arp's on the router when i had problems like this. Dunno if it's the recommended fix, but it worked. There is certainly no Proxy ARP required here since you do not do subnet sharing or funny games like that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_arp Carlos Narváez wrote: +---+ . ++ ¦ 192.168.251.1 +---+ 192.168.251.10 ¦ . ++ +---+ . ¦ 192.168.254.17 +---+ 192.168.254.16 ¦ . . . . . . . . . . ++ . ++ - A route has been configured on 192.168.251.1 to point all traffic for 192.168.254.0/24 to 192.168.251.10. - A route has been configured on 192.168.254.16 to point all traffic for 192.168.251.0/24 to 192.168.254.17. - The command iptables -I FORWARD -j ACCEPT has been executed. Well, and do the counters increase? Now.. here's what happens. 192.168.251.10 can ping both interfaces on the router. 192.168.254.16 can also ping both interfaces on the router. However, 192.168.251.1 cannot ping 192.168.254.16, and likewise, 192.168.254.16 cannot ping 192.168.251.1. What have I forgotten? Default GWs (though if you ahve routes, ok..). On 251.1, use `ip r g 192.168.254.16` and it should show 192.168.254.16 via 192.168.251.10 dev eth0 Same on the other side. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel 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.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Linux Router
CN == Carlos Narváez [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: CN - IP Forwarding has been enabled on the router via echo 1 CN /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward Try cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/*/forwarding. If any of them are 0, then echo 1 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/all/forwarding. /Benny - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel 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.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Linux Router
i used to add proxy arp's on the router when i had problems like this. Dunno if it's the recommended fix, but it worked. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_arp Carlos Narváez wrote: This is starting to frustrate me, because it should be much simpler than it seems to be, and I feel like I'm missing something small and obvious. I have two private networks, we'll say 192.168.254.0/24 and 192.168.251.0/24. And I have a linux box in the middle with addresses 192.168.254.17 and 192.168.251.10: +---+ . ++ ¦ 192.168.251.1 +---+ 192.168.251.10 ¦ . ++ +---+ . ¦ 192.168.254.17 +---+ 192.168.254.16 ¦ . . . . . . . . . . ++ . ++ There is no NAT involved.. I just want the box in the middle to pass traffic between the two networks. Here is what I have done: - IP Forwarding has been enabled on the router via "echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward" - A route has been configured on 192.168.251.1 to point all traffic for 192.168.254.0/24 to 192.168.251.10. - A route has been configured on 192.168.254.16 to point all traffic for 192.168.251.0/24 to 192.168.254.17. - The command "iptables -I FORWARD -j ACCEPT" has been executed. Now.. here's what happens. 192.168.251.10 can ping both interfaces on the router. 192.168.254.16 can also ping both interfaces on the router. However, 192.168.251.1 cannot ping 192.168.254.16, and likewise, 192.168.254.16 cannot ping 192.168.251.1. What have I forgotten? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" 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.tux.org/lkml/
Not kernel dev related story (Re: Linux Router)
* Sat, 22 Sep 2007 18:09:15 -0500 > This is starting to frustrate me, because it should be much simpler > than it seems to be, and I feel like I'm missing something small and > obvious. Please address such questions to any user forum, or to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> otherwise. While doing that, provide exact output of route and firewall tables, but not just semi hand-waving with just one command. Thank you. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" 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.tux.org/lkml/
Linux Router
This is starting to frustrate me, because it should be much simpler than it seems to be, and I feel like I'm missing something small and obvious. I have two private networks, we'll say 192.168.254.0/24 and 192.168.251.0/24. And I have a linux box in the middle with addresses 192.168.254.17 and 192.168.251.10: +---+ . ++ ¦ 192.168.251.1 +---+ 192.168.251.10 ¦ . ++ +---+ . ¦ 192.168.254.17 +---+ 192.168.254.16 ¦ . . . . . . . . . . ++ . ++ There is no NAT involved.. I just want the box in the middle to pass traffic between the two networks. Here is what I have done: - IP Forwarding has been enabled on the router via "echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward" - A route has been configured on 192.168.251.1 to point all traffic for 192.168.254.0/24 to 192.168.251.10. - A route has been configured on 192.168.254.16 to point all traffic for 192.168.251.0/24 to 192.168.254.17. - The command "iptables -I FORWARD -j ACCEPT" has been executed. Now.. here's what happens. 192.168.251.10 can ping both interfaces on the router. 192.168.254.16 can also ping both interfaces on the router. However, 192.168.251.1 cannot ping 192.168.254.16, and likewise, 192.168.254.16 cannot ping 192.168.251.1. What have I forgotten? -- Carlos Narváez http://www.juegopixel.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" 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.tux.org/lkml/
Linux Router
This is starting to frustrate me, because it should be much simpler than it seems to be, and I feel like I'm missing something small and obvious. I have two private networks, we'll say 192.168.254.0/24 and 192.168.251.0/24. And I have a linux box in the middle with addresses 192.168.254.17 and 192.168.251.10: +---+ . ++ ¦ 192.168.251.1 +---+ 192.168.251.10 ¦ . ++ +---+ . ¦ 192.168.254.17 +---+ 192.168.254.16 ¦ . . . . . . . . . . ++ . ++ There is no NAT involved.. I just want the box in the middle to pass traffic between the two networks. Here is what I have done: - IP Forwarding has been enabled on the router via echo 1 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward - A route has been configured on 192.168.251.1 to point all traffic for 192.168.254.0/24 to 192.168.251.10. - A route has been configured on 192.168.254.16 to point all traffic for 192.168.251.0/24 to 192.168.254.17. - The command iptables -I FORWARD -j ACCEPT has been executed. Now.. here's what happens. 192.168.251.10 can ping both interfaces on the router. 192.168.254.16 can also ping both interfaces on the router. However, 192.168.251.1 cannot ping 192.168.254.16, and likewise, 192.168.254.16 cannot ping 192.168.251.1. What have I forgotten? -- Carlos Narváez http://www.juegopixel.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel 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.tux.org/lkml/
Not kernel dev related story (Re: Linux Router)
* Sat, 22 Sep 2007 18:09:15 -0500 This is starting to frustrate me, because it should be much simpler than it seems to be, and I feel like I'm missing something small and obvious. Please address such questions to any user forum, or to [EMAIL PROTECTED] otherwise. While doing that, provide exact output of route and firewall tables, but not just semi hand-waving with just one command. Thank you. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel 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.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Linux Router
i used to add proxy arp's on the router when i had problems like this. Dunno if it's the recommended fix, but it worked. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_arp Carlos Narváez wrote: This is starting to frustrate me, because it should be much simpler than it seems to be, and I feel like I'm missing something small and obvious. I have two private networks, we'll say 192.168.254.0/24 and 192.168.251.0/24. And I have a linux box in the middle with addresses 192.168.254.17 and 192.168.251.10: +---+ . ++ ¦ 192.168.251.1 +---+ 192.168.251.10 ¦ . ++ +---+ . ¦ 192.168.254.17 +---+ 192.168.254.16 ¦ . . . . . . . . . . ++ . ++ There is no NAT involved.. I just want the box in the middle to pass traffic between the two networks. Here is what I have done: - IP Forwarding has been enabled on the router via echo 1 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward - A route has been configured on 192.168.251.1 to point all traffic for 192.168.254.0/24 to 192.168.251.10. - A route has been configured on 192.168.254.16 to point all traffic for 192.168.251.0/24 to 192.168.254.17. - The command iptables -I FORWARD -j ACCEPT has been executed. Now.. here's what happens. 192.168.251.10 can ping both interfaces on the router. 192.168.254.16 can also ping both interfaces on the router. However, 192.168.251.1 cannot ping 192.168.254.16, and likewise, 192.168.254.16 cannot ping 192.168.251.1. What have I forgotten? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel 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.tux.org/lkml/
