On 31/07/23 02:18, logothesia wrote:
Hi folks,
I have a very simple WG network with only two machines: 10.0.0.1 (NetBSD), and
10.0.0.2 (linux). Indeed they can ping each other just fine, but attempting to
ping 10.0.0.1 from itself yields the following error:
% ping 10.0.0.1
PING 10.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1): 56 data bytes
ping: sendto: No route to host
...
Is this intended behavior? If so, it seems very strange to me. Here is my
routing table:
% netstat -rn
Internet:
Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Mtu Interface
...
10/8 10.0.0.1 U - - - wg0
10.0.0.1 wg0 UHl - - - wg0
...
Looks fine, no?
It does look a bit different from ppoe0 which I chose because it is
probably the closest thing I have to a WireGuard interface.
I get the following from netstat and it looks like pppoe adds a route
via localhost to itself. Beware of possible line wrapping.
drumhunter$ netstat -rnfinet
Routing tables
Internet:
Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Mtu
Interface
default 114.23.164.222 US - - - pppoe0
...
114.23.17.255 114.23.164.222 UH - - - pppoe0
114.23.164.222 pppoe0 UHl - - - lo0
127/8 127.0.0.1 UGRS - - 33624 lo0
127.0.0.1 lo0 UHl - - 33624 lo0
...
Cheers,
Lloyd
