On Monday 20 October 2003 18:41, Selentek 24331-03 wrote: > On 10:30 Mon 20 Oct , David Gethings wrote: > > On Mon, 2003-10-20 at 09:48, Selentek 24331-03 wrote: > > > default * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 eth1 <- I down't know what is this. > > > > That is you default route. It is the route your PC uses to send traffic > > to your Cisco. > > > > > Is it right to ping 192.168.1.12 from 5.5.5.2 ? > > > > If you are pinging from the PC that bridges the two netwroks, then yes > > you will be able to ping both networks. > > > > > I down't want to see 192.168.1.12 from 5.5.5.0 network. > > > > I'm no expert on UNIX routing, but from the details you given I can see > > no reason why this is possible. Unless you have another PC that bridges > > these two networks. > > > > > Sorry for my english. > > > > You're doing fine... > > > > Cheers > > > > Dg > > > > > > -- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > > One more detail with tcpdump: > sudo tcpdump -f -i eth0 icmp > tcpdump: listening on eth0 > 13:50:21.969383 5.5.5.2 > 192.168.1.12: icmp: echo request > 13:50:21.969436 192.168.1.12 > 5.5.5.2: icmp: echo reply
What's the routing table on 5.5.5.2? If there's no static route to 192.168.1.0 via 192.168.1.12 and it's not the default gateway then 5.5.5.2 should not even send out an arp request. Is the device that is 5.5.5.2's default route aware of 192.168.1.12? If so, that could explain why 5.5.5.2 can ping 192.168.1.12 directly. Jason -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
