Hello, Pokotilenko Kostik a écrit :
1. There 3 servers and a router with 2 PPPoE connections (let call them: ppp0, ppp1). 2. There are several groups of Inet-clients to be served (Servers, Clients and Club). 3. The task is: - to route Club through the ppp1; - to Servers and Clients through ppp0;
[...]
router # netstat -nr Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt Iface 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 a1.a2.a3.a4 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 U 0 0 0 ppp0 b1.b2.b3.b4 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 U 0 0 0 ppp1
[...]
router # ip rule ls 0: from all lookup local 32763: from 10.10.100.101/24 lookup Club 32764: from 10.10.100.100/24 lookup Clients
There's something wrong with these two rules. 10.10.100.101/24 and 10.10.100.100/24 are not valid subnets. And if the IP routing strips the irrelevant least significant byte, they are actually identical subnets : 10.10.100.0/24.
32765: from 192.168.1.0/24 lookup Servers 32766: from all lookup main 32767: from all lookup default router # ip route ls table Clients default via a1.a2.a3.a4 dev ppp0
You should set an exception for eth0's address, else the router won't be able to reach 192.168.1.0/24 with this source address.
router # ip route ls table Servers default via a1.a2.a3.a4 dev ppp0 router # ip route ls table Club default via b1.b2.b3.b4 dev ppp1 ======================================== So, to summarize, the is no default route in main routing table. Each group of clients is to be routed through its respective connection, and, when its connection is down it is not to be routed. This scheme works almost fine, 10.10.100.100/24 addresses are really being routed through ppp0, 10.10.100.101/24 through ppp1 and 192.168.1.0/24 (3 Servers) through ppp0. BUT the router itself (192.168.1.4) has no route to any host.
Yes it has routes to some hosts : see the 'main' routing table. Did you mean "no route to any host but 192.168.1.0 and the two PPP peers" ?
I get "network is unreachable" to any connection attempt from 192.168.1.4. And I can't connect to this router from outside, because the packets have no route to be sent back. I thought that there is different routing politics for localhost and added default route to "local" table. 192.168.1.4 has started to have the route, but the rest of the scheme started to work incorrectly.
Don't do that. The "local" routing table is intended only for special routes such as localhost or broadcast routes.
So, the question is: how does the routing of packets comming from localhost is being accomplished?
In the same way as the routing of forwarded packets. From "ip rule" point of view, locally generated traffic is selected with "iif lo" (see iproute manual). Be aware that when the local source address is not explicitly specified by the sending application, none of your custom rules will match, so the "main" table will be used. But it contains no default route.
By the way, in your setup I don't understand how the destinations 10.10.100.100/24 and 10.10.100.101/24 are routed.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
