On 2015-01-22, Timothy Murphy
wrote:
> Recently, someone or something has been turning off IP forwarding
> on my CentOS server:
> --
> [tim@william NumberTheory]$ sudo sysctl net.ipv4.ip_forward
> net.ipv4.ip_forward = 0
> [tim@william NumberTheory]$ sudo sysctl -w net.ipv
Recently, someone or something has been turning off IP forwarding
on my CentOS server:
--
[tim@william NumberTheory]$ sudo sysctl net.ipv4.ip_forward
net.ipv4.ip_forward = 0
[tim@william NumberTheory]$ sudo sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_forward=1
net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1
[tim@william
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> If you look at the route table on your server after the tun interface
> comes up, you'll probably see that either your openvpn config or routes
> pushed from the remote have split the conceptual 'default' range in half
Nope. There's my ori
On 11/4/2010 11:42 AM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Can you explain what you are trying to accomplish as an end result?
>
> On the server side of the VPN is the 192.168.90.0 LAN *and* (because
> of routes pushed by the VPN server to my client) the p
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Can you explain what you are trying to accomplish as an end result?
On the server side of the VPN is the 192.168.90.0 LAN *and* (because
of routes pushed by the VPN server to my client) the public IP space
of the VPN server's network. That an
On 11/4/2010 10:09 AM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
>
>>> Maybe the simplest thing is to change the question: How can I cause
>>> packets forwarded from my LAN to avoid the VPN and go out via the
>>> regular default route?
>>>
>> You can ad a line like:
>>
>> push "route 192.168.144.0 255.255.255.0"
>>
>>
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 11/4/2010 9:50 AM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
>> Hrm. When I try to add such a route on one of the machines I want to
>> reach, I get "SIOCADDRT: Network is unreachable".
>
> That means you don't already have a direct route to the IP you specifie
On 11/4/2010 9:50 AM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 5:49 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Quick check is a traceroute from the remote server to a 192.168.144.x
>> address.
>> If it doesn't go into the tunnel interface you need to add a route for the
>> range
>> via the remote tunnel ip
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Emmett Culley wrote:
> On 11/04/2010 07:50 AM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
>> Maybe the simplest thing is to change the question: How can I cause
>> packets forwarded from my LAN to avoid the VPN and go out via the
>> regular default route?
>>
> You can ad a line like:
>
On 11/04/2010 07:50 AM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 5:49 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Quick check is a traceroute from the remote server to a 192.168.144.x
>> address.
>> If it doesn't go into the tunnel interface you need to add a route for the
>> range
>> via the remote tunnel
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 5:49 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Quick check is a traceroute from the remote server to a 192.168.144.x address.
> If it doesn't go into the tunnel interface you need to add a route for the
> range
> via the remote tunnel ip.
Hrm. When I try to add such a route on one of the
On 11/4/10 3:39 AM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> You probably are forwarding packets to the other end of the vpn. Does
>> whatever
>> is on the other end have a route back to your 192.168.144.x range through
>> that
>> end of the vpn?
>
> Ah, that
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> You probably are forwarding packets to the other end of the vpn. Does whatever
> is on the other end have a route back to your 192.168.144.x range through that
> end of the vpn?
Ah, that may indeed be the problem. I'm a bit rusty with this st
On 11/3/10 8:00 PM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> I have a CentOS 4 server that acts as a gateway for a small LAN. The
> lower half of the 192.168.144 address space is the LAN on eth1, the
> upper half is the WAN on eth0, and the default route is to
> 192.168.144.254 which is my DSL router; this has bee
I have a CentOS 4 server that acts as a gateway for a small LAN. The
lower half of the 192.168.144 address space is the LAN on eth1, the
upper half is the WAN on eth0, and the default route is to
192.168.144.254 which is my DSL router; this has been working fine for
years.
However, it's recently
15 matches
Mail list logo
