Re: route table behind router
On Lu, 14 feb 11, 18:34:01, Mike McClain wrote: On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:49:13PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote: According to a quick search seems to imply that a firewall or a router along the way is the culprit. If you are lucky it's the router and a firmware upgrade might solve the problem. From this I take it you think ecn should be set to 1? http://www.frozentux.net/ipsysctl-tutorial/chunkyhtml/tcpvariables.html The firmware in my router is the latest offered. :( Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: route table behind router
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 11:48:53AM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote: On Lu, 14 feb 11, 18:34:01, Mike McClain wrote: From this I take it you think ecn should be set to 1? http://www.frozentux.net/ipsysctl-tutorial/chunkyhtml/tcpvariables.html Thanks Andrei, I'll take a look. Mike -- Satisfied user of Linux since 1997. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110215171917.GA2457@playground
Re: route table behind router
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:49:13PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote: According to a quick search seems to imply that a firewall or a router along the way is the culprit. If you are lucky it's the router and a firmware upgrade might solve the problem. From this I take it you think ecn should be set to 1? The firmware in my router is the latest offered. Thanks, Mike -- Satisfied user of Linux since 1997. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110215023401.GB18353@playground
Re: route table behind router
In 20110213070459.GA4674@playground, Mike McClain wrote: root@/deb40a:~ echo 0 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn now fetchmail works and I can get urls in firefox To get this done automatically at boot, edit /etc/sysctl.conf and add the line: net.ipv4.tcp_ecn = 0 -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. b...@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: route table behind router
On Sb, 12 feb 11, 23:04:59, Mike McClain wrote: root@/deb40a:~ echo 0 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn now fetchmail works and I can get urls in firefox According to a quick search seems to imply that a firewall or a router along the way is the culprit. If you are lucky it's the router and a firmware upgrade might solve the problem. Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: route table behind router [ solved ]
To recap: It started with me thinking I had a problem with my routing table. The setup is like so: cox cable-NetGear routerWindows box \--Debian box I can access the windows box through the router via smbclient. Even with IPtables that are ACCEPT, ACCEPT, ACCEPT, ... neither lynx or Firefox can access the inet though they can access the router. On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:21:16AM +0100, Pascal Hambourg wrote: Web browers are poor tools when it comes to check IP connectivity. Try ping and traceroute instead, with both host names and numeric IP addresses as targets. What about /etc/resolv.conf ? ping and traceroute both show I have access to the web though the output of traceroute for several different addresses shows: 1 router (192.168.1.1) 0.475 ms 0.405 ms 0.353 ms 2 10.157.32.1 (10.157.32.1) 8.750 ms 7.200 ms 7.998 ms Is the 10.157.32.1 address normal? This demonstrated that /etc/resolv.conf was not the problem. On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 05:59:15AM -0500, Paul Cartwright wrote: paulandcilla:/var/log# route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse Iface 192.168.10.00.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 00 eth0 0.0.0.0 192.168.10.10.0.0.0 UG0 00 eth0 make sure it is using the gateway you think it is. Which assured me the problem was not in my route table. He also sent me his /etc/network/interfaces showing his uses a static IP address which inspired me to explore setting mine static and doing away with dhclient. This worked and simplified my system. It required configuring the router to assign the same IP address to my computer based on Mac address of my ethernet card. On Thu, 10 Feb 2011, Camale?n wrote: Some cable providers (at least in Spain) tweak their cable modems to allow only one computer to browse the web (by means of filters that restrict the access to only one MAC address). To avoid this, there are routers that can clone the MAC address so other computers in the network can access the web. My Netgear router was setup to respond with the Windows PCs MAC. I set it to use the Linux box's MAC and lost all inet access so set it to the router's MAC then called Cox (the ISP) and got them to reset on their end and got their assurance that I should be able to connect with either box. On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 09:02:32PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote: No, but maybe the output of 'host google.com' and 'wget google.com' can help diagnose. root@/deb40a:~ wget -v google.com --16:28:14-- http://google.com/ = `google.com/index.html' Resolving google.com... 74.125.227.20, 74.125.227.16, 74.125.227.17, ... Connecting to google.com[74.125.227.20]:80... failed: Connection timed out. Connecting to google.com[74.125.227.16]:80... failed: Connection timed out. Connecting to google.com[74.125.227.17]:80... failed: Connection timed out. On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 08:06:07PM +0100, Pascal Hambourg wrote: An HTTP proxy setting ? I looked at both the Win2K system and the ppp setup but found no evidence of proxy usage. On Sat, 12 Feb 2011, Andrei Popescu wrote: Hmm, is the router using PPPoE to connect to your ISP? Try this: ifconfig eth0 mtu 1400 I tried this but no joy. On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 12:45:39PM +0100, Pascal Hambourg wrote: MTU issues should only affect big packets containing data, not the establishement of the connection. But it is worth the try. Adapt the interface name to the one connected to the router. At this point, I have two ideas : either a problem with TCP connections or specifically with HTTP connections. I would first try to connect to other TCP-based services such as SMTP, POP3, FTP... If it fails too, then the problem is with TCP, likely with some TCP option not supported by the router or the ISP. The usual suspects are window scaling, timestamps, ECN, SACK, which can be enabled or disabled via sysctl variables in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/. Try to enable and disable each of them and see what happens. You can also use tcpdump to capture the packets on the interface while trying to connect. Another useful tool is tcptraceroute, it can help to see where something wrong happens. root@/deb40a:~ echo 0 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn Now fetchmail and exim work and I can get urls in lynx and firefox. Problem solved. My thanks to all who offered suggestions. Mike -- Satisfied user of Linux since 1997. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110213223432.GB1368@playground
Re: route table behind router
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 02:18:37AM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: To get this done automatically at boot, edit /etc/sysctl.conf and add the line: net.ipv4.tcp_ecn = 0 Done and thank you, Mike -- Satisfied user of Linux since 1997. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110213223331.GA1368@playground
Re: route table behind router
On Vi, 11 feb 11, 19:20:40, Mike McClain wrote: On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 09:02:32PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote: On Jo, 10 feb 11, 10:12:30, Mike McClain wrote: I've done something to keep browsers that connect just fine via ppp from connecting via eth0. Thoughts? No, but maybe the output of 'host google.com' and 'wget google.com' can help diagnose. I don't have 'host' but root@/deb40a:~ wget -v google.com --16:28:14-- http://google.com/ = `google.com/index.html' Resolving google.com... 74.125.227.20, 74.125.227.16, 74.125.227.17, ... Connecting to google.com[74.125.227.20]:80... failed: Connection timed out. Connecting to google.com[74.125.227.16]:80... failed: Connection timed out. Connecting to google.com[74.125.227.17]:80... failed: Connection timed out. while Hmm, is the router using PPPoE to connect to your ISP? Try this: ifconfig eth0 mtu 1400 Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: route table behind router
Andrei Popescu a écrit : On Vi, 11 feb 11, 19:20:40, Mike McClain wrote: root@/deb40a:~ wget -v google.com --16:28:14-- http://google.com/ = `google.com/index.html' Resolving google.com... 74.125.227.20, 74.125.227.16, 74.125.227.17, ... Connecting to google.com[74.125.227.20]:80... failed: Connection timed out. Connecting to google.com[74.125.227.16]:80... failed: Connection timed out. Connecting to google.com[74.125.227.17]:80... failed: Connection timed out. Hmm, is the router using PPPoE to connect to your ISP? Try this: ifconfig eth0 mtu 1400 MTU issues should only affect big packets containing data, not the establishement of the connection. But it is worth the try. Adapt the interface name to the one connected to the router. At this point, I have two ideas : either a problem with TCP connections or specifically with HTTP connections. I would first try to connect to other TCP-based services such as SMTP, POP3, FTP... If it fails too, then the problem is with TCP, likely with some TCP option not supported by the router or the ISP. The usual suspects are window scaling, timestamps, ECN, SACK, which can be enabled or disabled via sysctl variables in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/. Try to enable and disable each of them and see what happens. You can also use tcpdump to capture the packets on the interface while trying to connect. Another useful tool is tcptraceroute, it can help to see where something wrong happens. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d5672e3.3020...@plouf.fr.eu.org
Re: route table behind router
On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 19:16:56 -0800, Mike McClain wrote: On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:57:17PM +, Camale?n wrote: Some cable providers (at least in Spain) tweak their cable modems to allow only one computer to browse the web (by means of filters that restrict the access to only one MAC address). To avoid this, there are routers that can clone the MAC address so other computers in the network can access the web. Thanks for the idea, I'll try to figure out how to test that. Mike That should be easy to test. Disconnect from the router any other computer you have in the network and plug just the Debian box. Power cycle the cable modem and test what happens. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.02.12.12.54...@gmail.com
Re: route table behind router
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 12:45:39PM +0100, Pascal Hambourg wrote: snip At this point, I have two ideas : either a problem with TCP connections or specifically with HTTP connections. I would first try to connect to other TCP-based services such as SMTP, POP3, FTP... If it fails too, then the problem is with TCP, likely with some TCP option not supported by the router or the ISP. The usual suspects are window scaling, timestamps, ECN, SACK, which can be enabled or disabled via sysctl variables in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/. Try to enable and disable each of them and see what happens. Blessings upon your house. root@/deb40a:~ echo 0 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn now fetchmail works and I can get urls in firefox Thank you very much, Mike PS: I've the biggest grin on my face. :) -- Satisfied user of Linux since 1997. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110213070459.GA4674@playground
Re: route table behind router
Mike McClain mike.j...@nethere.com wrote: I've done something to keep browsers that connect just fine via ppp from connecting via eth0. File Work offline (or the equivalent) isn't set, is it? Chris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/kedf28xb4t@news.roaima.co.uk
Re: route table behind router
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 09:51:48AM +, Chris Davies wrote: Mike McClain mike.j...@nethere.com wrote: I've done something to keep browsers that connect just fine via ppp from connecting via eth0. File Work offline (or the equivalent) isn't set, is it? Chris No but thanks for the thought. Mike -- Satisfied user of Linux since 1997. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110212024951.GB19144@playground
Re: route table behind router
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 08:06:07PM +0100, Pascal Hambourg wrote: Mike McClain a ?crit : I've done something to keep browsers that connect just fine via ppp from connecting via eth0. Thoughts? An HTTP proxy setting ? That was rather common with dialup connections. I had to go online to find out what a proxy is and no, not used here. And looking over the Windows machine's configuration I saw no indications of a proxy being used. Anybody out there using Cox and Debian to compare setups with? Thanks for the ideas Pascal, Mike -- Satisfied user of Linux since 1997. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110212032144.GB19277@playground
Re: route table behind router
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:57:17PM +, Camale?n wrote: Some cable providers (at least in Spain) tweak their cable modems to allow only one computer to browse the web (by means of filters that restrict the access to only one MAC address). To avoid this, there are routers that can clone the MAC address so other computers in the network can access the web. Thanks for the idea, I'll try to figure out how to test that. Mike -- Satisfied user of Linux since 1997. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110212031656.GA18886@playground
Re: route table behind router
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 09:02:32PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote: On Jo, 10 feb 11, 10:12:30, Mike McClain wrote: I've done something to keep browsers that connect just fine via ppp from connecting via eth0. Thoughts? No, but maybe the output of 'host google.com' and 'wget google.com' can help diagnose. I don't have 'host' but root@/deb40a:~ wget -v google.com --16:28:14-- http://google.com/ = `google.com/index.html' Resolving google.com... 74.125.227.20, 74.125.227.16, 74.125.227.17, ... Connecting to google.com[74.125.227.20]:80... failed: Connection timed out. Connecting to google.com[74.125.227.16]:80... failed: Connection timed out. Connecting to google.com[74.125.227.17]:80... failed: Connection timed out. while root@/deb40a:~ ping google.com PING google.com (74.125.227.20) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 74.125.227.20: icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=67.4 ms 64 bytes from 74.125.227.20: icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=76.1 ms and root@/deb40a:~ traceroute google.com traceroute: Warning: google.com has multiple addresses; using 74.125.227.20 traceroute to google.com (74.125.227.20), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 router (192.168.1.1) 0.456 ms 0.387 ms 0.344 ms 2 10.157.32.1 (10.157.32.1) 7.122 ms 11.107 ms 44.516 ms 3 68.6.11.158 (68.6.11.158) 11.025 ms 20.969 ms 40.652 ms 4 68.6.8.174 (68.6.8.174) 10.219 ms 11.311 ms 10.260 ms ... 9 74.125.227.20 (74.125.227.20) 66.357 ms 65.712 ms 63.438 ms though I must admit I find the 10.157.32.1 address confusing. In a message from Paul Cartwright he said, 'in my interfaces file I have a DHCP setup commented out, I use static IP'. So I tried that and the messages you see above are after my switching to static IP address. So it now looks like the question I need to answer is: What do wget and browsers have in common that is handled differently when using ppp0 vs. eth0? Thanks for your support. With the help of this list, though the symptoms haven't changed the problem just may be closer to solution. Mike -- Satisfied user of Linux since 1997. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110212032040.GA19277@playground
Re: route table behind router
Hello, Mike McClain a écrit : I can access the windows box through the router via smbclient. Even with IPtables that are ACCEPT, ACCEPT, ACCEPT, ... neither lynx or Firefox can access the inet though they can access the router. Web browers are poor tools when it comes to check IP connectivity. Try ping and traceroute instead, with both host names and numeric IP addresses as targets. root@/deb40a:~ ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:01:02:38:DA:9F inet addr:192.168.1.2 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:2755 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1319 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:1 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:679139 (663.2 KiB) TX bytes:184119 (179.8 KiB) Interrupt:10 Base address:0x6500 ... root@/deb40a:~ route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse Iface 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 00 eth0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG0 00 eth0 This looks perfectly fine. What about /etc/resolv.conf ? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d53ae0c.1040...@plouf.fr.eu.org
Re: route table behind router
On Mi, 09 feb 11, 15:27:48, Mike McClain wrote: [snip] Here is what I'd do to try troubleshooting this: - ping internal ip of the router (192.168.1.1) - ping external ip of the router (you find it somewhere in its status page) - ping the router's default gateway and its DNS servers (also from the status page) - ping some IP on the internet (8.8.8.8 is one of Google's DNS servers) If all this works try 'ping google.com' to eliminate any DNS problems... BTW, you didn't show your /etc/resolv.conf Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: route table behind router
On Wed, 09 Feb 2011 15:27:48 -0800, Mike McClain wrote: (...) Windows has no problem but the Debian box can still only see the net via the phone modem and dialup. (...) Just an additional note on this. Some cable providers (at least in Spain) tweak their cable modems to allow only one computer to browse the web (by means of filters that restrict the access to only one MAC address). To avoid this, there are routers that can clone the MAC address so other computers in the network can access the web. But I don't think you are experiencing such problem, most probably a DNS issue. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.02.10.12.57...@gmail.com
Re: route table behind router
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:21:16AM +0100, Pascal Hambourg wrote: Hello, Mike McClain a ?crit : I can access the windows box through the router via smbclient. Even with IPtables that are ACCEPT, ACCEPT, ACCEPT, ... neither lynx or Firefox can access the inet though they can access the router. Web browers are poor tools when it comes to check IP connectivity. Try ping and traceroute instead, with both host names and numeric IP addresses as targets. ping and traceroute both show I have access to the web though the output of traceroute for several different addresses shows: 1 router (192.168.1.1) 0.475 ms 0.405 ms 0.353 ms 2 10.157.32.1 (10.157.32.1) 8.750 ms 7.200 ms 7.998 ms Is the 10.157.32.1 address normal? Aside from that what could make addresses available to the browser via ppp unavailable via the cable inet connection? Thanks for your help, Mike -- Satisfied user of Linux since 1997. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110210180457.GA8954@playground
Re: route table behind router
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:32:42PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote: On Mi, 09 feb 11, 15:27:48, Mike McClain wrote: [snip] Here is what I'd do to try troubleshooting this: - ping some IP on the internet (8.8.8.8 is one of Google's DNS servers) If all this works try 'ping google.com' to eliminate any DNS problems... BTW, you didn't show your /etc/resolv.conf Hi Andre, From Pascal Hambourg's message using ping and traceroute I found that my eth0 connection seems not to be the problem. Nor is it a resolver problem since I can ping/traceroute using both urls and ip addresses. I've done something to keep browsers that connect just fine via ppp from connecting via eth0. Thoughts? Thanks for your help, Mike -- Satisfied user of Linux since 1997. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110210181229.GC8954@playground
Re: route table behind router
On Jo, 10 feb 11, 10:12:30, Mike McClain wrote: I've done something to keep browsers that connect just fine via ppp from connecting via eth0. Thoughts? No, but maybe the output of 'host google.com' and 'wget google.com' can help diagnose. Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: route table behind router
Mike McClain a écrit : I've done something to keep browsers that connect just fine via ppp from connecting via eth0. Thoughts? An HTTP proxy setting ? That was rather common with dialup connections. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d54371f.7030...@plouf.fr.eu.org
route table behind router
After a decade of dialup So Cal. Cox finally made me an offer I couldn't refuse. I've switched but can't connect on my Debian box. I've spent the last two weeks reading man pages, HOWTOs, searching the web and Deb user list archives but still don't get it. The setup is like so: cox cable-NetGear routerWindows box \--Debian box Windows has no problem but the Debian box can still only see the net via the phone modem and dialup. I've added DHCP via the dhclient package though since the router assigns the addresses 192.168.1.2 3 to the Debian and Windows boxes respectively I suspect I don't really need it. I can access the windows box through the router via smbclient. Even with IPtables that are ACCEPT, ACCEPT, ACCEPT, ... neither lynx or Firefox can access the inet though they can access the router. root@/deb40a:~ ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:01:02:38:DA:9F inet addr:192.168.1.2 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:2755 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1319 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:1 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:679139 (663.2 KiB) TX bytes:184119 (179.8 KiB) Interrupt:10 Base address:0x6500 loLink encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 ... root@/deb40a:~ route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric RefUse Iface 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 00 eth0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG0 00 eth0 What am I missing? If some one with a setup similar to mine would show me their routing table I'd appreciate it as I'm stumped. Thanks, Mike -- Satisfied user of Linux since 1997. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110209232748.GA23635@playground
Question pppd and route table
Hi I am trying to create a pptp tunnel over a vpn (work related), it seems like the work client checks the route table for any changes :(, thats cool, I have route table 50 setup for all my extra pppd routing I want, but, it seems like whenever pppd (or is it pptp) starts talking to an end point it adds in a route on how to get to the vpn server, I can't seem to configure this, cause I want to put it into route table 50 so the vpn client will not see it. and I can't find any switches to configure it. so before I delve into the code, any one else seen this, got and info on alex signature.asc Description: Digital signature
keep route table
I've add many rule on route table but when restart my PC , they're gone . How to keep them remain ? -- --- Cao Van Khanh
Re: keep route table
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 12:26:37AM +0700, Khanh Cao Van wrote: I've add many rule on route table but when restart my PC , they're gone . How to keep them remain ? Add them in the /etc/network/interfaces file under the appropriate device, e.g., eth0. Check the man page for interfaces(5) for the proper format. -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr pgpUqHg5y72pZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
funny route table?
i recently installed woody as the base for a firewall. i basically set up a scheme where it was the only link to a subnet of 'protected' computers and no packets were allowed to reach them. i had set up NAT on them and let those packets through, but the connections would be originating from behind the wall. NFS was acting curiously slow. to ensure that it wasn't the NAT, i opened the firewall up to forward packets, and added a route on my NFS server to the subnet of computers behind the (now disabled) firewall. interestingly, NFS was still horendously (unusably) slow, although it did actually function given enough time. i noticed that my route table on the debian firewall had entries of '40' for the MSS, a rather odd number, considering that the MSS is generally 40 *less* than the MTU (which is 1500 for ethernet). i hadn't set these explicitly, and 'tracepath' reported an MTU of 1500 to UDP port 2049 (NFS). i'm no network wiz, but something was funny. explicitly setting the MSS to 1460 (1500 - 40 for headers) changed neither performance nor what 'tracepath' reported for the MTU. ANYWAY, does anyone know why my route table was showing 40 as an MSS? presumably this would have been set by some auto-detection scheme, but the topology of the network is quite straightforward (node to hub to node to switch to node), end-to-end. all NICs are 10 or 100 Mb, and it's all CAT5 cabling. pretty standard stuff. aside all that, does it seem that the route MSS is misleading and its strictly an NFS problem? what gives? PS: i've played around with the r/w chunk sizes on the NFS clients (SGI), of course, accomplishing nothing. -c
flush route table?
Hello, Is it possible to flush the route table in debian with the route cmd? I know its possible in freeBSD. If not what might be some other options? Thank you in advance for your time. Andrew
Re: flush route table?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, Is it possible to flush the route table in debian with the route cmd? I know its possible in freeBSD. If not what might be some other options? Thank you in advance for your time. only way i know how to do it is to restart networking /etc/init.d/networking restart takes less then a second on my systems. nate -- ::: ICQ: 75132336 http://www.aphroland.org/ http://www.linuxpowered.net/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: flush route table?
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, Is it possible to flush the route table in debian with the route cmd? I know its possible in freeBSD. If not what might be some other options? Thank you in advance for your time. Hi there, If you have the iproute package installed, you can run: ip route flush Simon
need to add 255.255.255.255 to route table
hello, I recently installed a fresh potato box from 2.2r I need to add: route add -host 255.255.255.255 dev eth1 to my route table to make windozs boxes happy w/ dhcp allocation where can I add this line to execute at boot? using 2.1 w/ 2..0.X I was able to add it to /etc/init.d/network that file no longer exists and has been replaced by /etc/network/interface I have tried to make an executable script and adding a link to /etc/rcS.d and rc3.d call S38interface, but that doesn't seem to work thanks for any thoughtful suggestions
Re: need to add 255.255.255.255 to route table
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 05:17:39PM -0800, Nick Barron wrote: hello, I recently installed a fresh potato box from 2.2r I need to add: route add -host 255.255.255.255 dev eth1 to my route table to make windozs boxes happy w/ dhcp allocation where can I add this line to execute at boot? using 2.1 w/ 2..0.X I was able to add it to /etc/init.d/network that file no longer exists and has been replaced by /etc/network/interface I have tried to make an executable script and adding a link to /etc/rcS.d and rc3.d call S38interface, but that doesn't seem to work thanks for any thoughtful suggestions /etc/network/interfaces hth, kent -- I'd really love ta wana help ya Flanders but... Homer Simpson
Re: need to add 255.255.255.255 to route table
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 07:32:54AM -0600, ktb wrote: On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 05:17:39PM -0800, Nick Barron wrote: hello, I recently installed a fresh potato box from 2.2r I need to add: route add -host 255.255.255.255 dev eth1 to my route table to make windozs boxes happy w/ dhcp allocation where can I add this line to execute at boot? using 2.1 w/ 2..0.X I was able to add it to /etc/init.d/network that file no longer exists and has been replaced by /etc/network/interface I have tried to make an executable script and adding a link to /etc/rcS.d and rc3.d call S38interface, but that doesn't seem to work thanks for any thoughtful suggestions /etc/network/interfaces hth, kent Sorry for the not-so-thoughtful-suggestion. I just got out of bed and didn't read properly. I spoke to Nick off list. I suggested he create a file in /etc/init.d/ - #! /bin/sh route add -host 255.255.255.255 dev eth1 chmod 755 and run update-rc.d If someone has something better to add please do so. kent -- I'd really love ta wana help ya Flanders but... Homer Simpson
Re: need to add 255.255.255.255 to route table
Nick Barron wrote: hello, I recently installed a fresh potato box from 2.2r I need to add: route add -host 255.255.255.255 dev eth1 to my route table to make windozs boxes happy w/ dhcp allocation where can I add this line to execute at boot? using 2.1 w/ 2..0.X I was able to add it to /etc/init.d/network that file no longer exists and has been replaced by /etc/network/interface I have tried to make an executable script and adding a link to /etc/rcS.d and rc3.d call S38interface, but that doesn't seem to work thanks for any thoughtful suggestions From `man interfaces`: up command Run command after bringing the interface up. This option can be given multiple times for a single interface. If so, the commands will be executed in order. If one of the commands fails, none of the others will be executed, but the interface will remain configured. (You can ensure a command never fails by suffixing || true.) so you could add this line to your /etc/network/interfaces for the interface in question: up route add -host 255.255.255.255 dev eth1 -- Morgan Terry
RE:changing route table ?
Hello Fellow Debin Users ! I used to have my debian box conected through a gateway, set up with route add default gw 192.168.0.1 Now that gateway ceased to exist, and each time I want to connect to internet I cant. I have to: route -n (otherwise it tries to resolve names through the gateway) route del default gw 192.168.0.1 route add default gw ISP dinamic IP Why does it insist on using the old gateway ?. Is there a way to make permanent changes? (they were permanent the first time !!) Thanks in advance. Mark. To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
Re: changing route table ?
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000 11:45:56 - Bob [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I used to have my debian box conected through a gateway, set up with route add default gw 192.168.0.1 Now that gateway ceased to exist, and each time I want to connect to internet I cant. I have to: route -n (otherwise it tries to resolve names through the gateway) route del default gw 192.168.0.1 route add default gw ISP dinamic IP Why does it insist on using the old gateway ?. Is there a way to make permanent changes? (they were permanent the first time !!) Make your changes in /etc/network/interfaces HTH -- Christoph Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ^X^C q quit :q ^C end x exit ZZ ^D ? help shit .
route table
doesn't work! - Original Message - From: HENNEQUIN Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2000 5:16 PM In-reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (message from Beavis on Sat, 08 Apr 2000 17:07:53 -0700) Subject: Re: routing table References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --text follows this line-- i just want 255.0.0.0 use netmask : route add 127.0.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 lo how many replies did you get ;-)
RE: route table
On 09-Apr-2000 00:33:46 Beavis wrote: doesn't work! Did you do 'ifconfig lo 127.0.0.1 netmask 255.0.0.0' ? (before the route add command)
Route table
I have run into an interesting problem and after consulting all the documentation I can get my hands on, I haven't found a similar example to run from and consequently hope that I can be enlightened by someone here. Here is the problem, we have a Debian box, multihomed going into a 3com ISDN mode/router, eth0 has an IP of 131.107.2.216 subnet of 255.255.255.0 (don't ask, I don't know myself, it was done before I got there) and eth1 has an IP of 207.158.140.138 subnet of 255.255.255.248 (This subnet was given to use because our ISP has given us 3 dedicated IP's to use), our static Internet IP is 207.158.140.137 subnet 255.255.255.248. The modem/router has an internal IP of 207.158.140.139 subnet 255.255.255.248. Now, this is what needs to be accomplished. We need to have the Debian box act as a gateway to the Internet and send all Internet bound requests through eth1. In essence (at least in my mind) the 3com box has to be transparent otherwise it will screw up the routing. I can ping both Interfaces from the Debian box from itself and from any given node I can ping the 131.x.x.x address on the Debian box. Also, the nodes are have the Debian box 131.x.x.x address set as the gateway in the network config. I can post the ifconfig output and the current route table if needed. Thanks... -Jason
Re: Route Table, more info
Here is the current route table, (output of netstat -nr)
131.107.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 1500 0 0
eth0
127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 3584 0 0 lo
The reason that it doesn't show the 207.158.140.138 address is because it
says that it can't reach the network when it runs the /etc/init.d/network
script. The current contents of /etc/init.d/network:
#! /bin/sh
ifconfig lo 127.0.0.1
route add -net 127.0.0.0
IPADDR=131.107.2.216
NETMASK=255.255.255.0
NETWORK=131.107.2.0
BROADCAST=131.107.2.255
GATEWAY=207.158.140.139
ifconfig eth0 ${IPADDR} netmask ${NETMASK} broadcast ${BROADCAST}
route -n add -net ${NETWORK}
ADDRESS=207.158.140.138
SUBNET=255.255.255.248
NET=207.158.140.0
BROADCAS=207.158.140.255
GATE=207.158.140.139
ifconfig eth1 ${ADDRESS} netmask ${SUBNET} broadcast ${BROADCAS}
route -n add -net ${NET}
[ ${GATE} ] route add default gw ${GATE} metric 1
Below is a diagram of our setup:
Internet
|
ISDN Router Connection to ISP (207.158.140.137)
|
ISDN Router Internal IP (207.158.140.139)
|
Debian box eth1 (207.158.140.138)
|
Debian box eth0 (131.107.2.216)
Now to recap a bit, the idea is that we need to use the debian box as the
gateway instead of the 3com ISDN router/modem. Also, on the ISDN modem, NAT
is disabled as well as DHCP. Again, if more information is needed please let
me know..
-Jason
Re: Route Table, more info
Jason:
You have nothing else on the ethernet segment that contains the router
internal interface and the debian eth1 interface, right? First, stop
paying for 2 IP addresses that you don't need. Assign internal IP
addresses to the router internal and debian eth1 interfaces, from one
of these IP networks: 10.0.0.0/8, 192.9.200.0/24, or, um... some class
B network whose number I can't think of right now.
So:
Machine Interface IP Address
-- -- --
router eth_if 10.0.0.1
router isdn_if 207.158.140.137
debian eth0131.107.2.216
debian eth110.0.0.2
Set up the router routing tables like this:
10.0.0.0/8 eth_if
131.107.2.0/24 gw 10.0.0.2
ISP Gateway/32isdn_if
0.0.0.0/0 gw ISP Gateway
Set up the debian routing tables like this:
10.0.0.0/8 eth1
131.107.2.0/24 eth0
0.0.0.0/0 gw 10.0.0.1
(I used a kind of short-hand there, but I hope it's obvious what I was
trying to say.)
For every machine on the 131.107.2.0 network, you can now use the debian
machine as the gateway.
Does that work for you?
Marc
--
Marc Mongeon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unix Specialist
Ban-Koe Systems
9100 W Bloomington Fwy
Bloomington, MN 55431-2200
(612)888-0123, x417 | FAX: (612)888-3344
--
It's such a fine line between clever and stupid.
-- David St. Hubbins and Nigel Tufnel of Spinal Tap
Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/23 6:21 AM
Here is the current route table, (output of netstat -nr)
131.107.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 1500 0 0
eth0
127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 3584 0 0 lo
The reason that it doesn't show the 207.158.140.138 address is because it
says that it can't reach the network when it runs the /etc/init.d/network
script. The current contents of /etc/init.d/network:
#! /bin/sh
ifconfig lo 127.0.0.1
route add -net 127.0.0.0
IPADDR=131.107.2.216
NETMASK=255.255.255.0
NETWORK=131.107.2.0
BROADCAST=131.107.2.255
GATEWAY=207.158.140.139
ifconfig eth0 ${IPADDR} netmask ${NETMASK} broadcast ${BROADCAST}
route -n add -net ${NETWORK}
ADDRESS=207.158.140.138
SUBNET=255.255.255.248
NET=207.158.140.0
BROADCAS=207.158.140.255
GATE=207.158.140.139
ifconfig eth1 ${ADDRESS} netmask ${SUBNET} broadcast ${BROADCAS}
route -n add -net ${NET}
[ ${GATE} ] route add default gw ${GATE} metric 1
Below is a diagram of our setup:
Internet
|
ISDN Router Connection to ISP (207.158.140.137)
|
ISDN Router Internal IP (207.158.140.139)
|
Debian box eth1 (207.158.140.138)
|
Debian box eth0 (131.107.2.216)
Now to recap a bit, the idea is that we need to use the debian box as the
gateway instead of the 3com ISDN router/modem. Also, on the ISDN modem, NAT
is disabled as well as DHCP. Again, if more information is needed please let
me know..
-Jason
--
Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Route Table, more info
On Tue, 23 Nov 1999 08:02:43 CST, Marc Mongeon writes: Jason: You have nothing else on the ethernet segment that contains the router internal interface and the debian eth1 interface, right? First, stop paying for 2 IP addresses that you don't need. Assign internal IP addresses to the router internal and debian eth1 interfaces, from one of these IP networks: 10.0.0.0/8, 192.9.200.0/24, or, um... some class B network whose number I can't think of right now. that would be: 192.168.0.0/16 172.16.0.0/12 10.0.0.0/8 _Don't_ use 192.9.200.0, these aren't private ip-adresses, take a look at RFC1918. rw -- - ___ - Robert Waldner Junior Network Engineer // / ___ _/_ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] RW960-RIPE --- /--- / / / / /___/ / --- EUnet EDV-DienstleistungsgesmbH -- /___ /___/ / / /___ /_ Diefenbachgasse 35 A-1150 Wien - - Tel: +43 1 89933 0 Fax: +43 1 89933 533
Re: Route Table, more info
Robert: Thanks for the correction, and the RFC pointer. I've got it clearly bookmarked now, so I won't make the same mistake again. Marc -- Marc Mongeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unix Specialist Ban-Koe Systems 9100 W Bloomington Fwy Bloomington, MN 55431-2200 (612)888-0123, x417 | FAX: (612)888-3344 -- It's such a fine line between clever and stupid. -- David St. Hubbins and Nigel Tufnel of Spinal Tap Robert Waldner [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/23 8:22 AM [...] that would be: 192.168.0.0/16 172.16.0.0/12 10.0.0.0/8 [...]
Host Unreachable even though it's in the route table
My ISP has just changed my IP number, gateway and DNS server. I have manually changed the routing information in /etc/init.d/network to reflect the new numbers yet when I ping the gateway I get Destination Host Unreachable. the route -n command gives me the following output... DestinationGatewayGenmaskFlagsMetric RefUseIFace 195.44.34.0 0.0.0.0255.255.255.0 U0 0xeth0 192.168.1.00.0.0.0255.255.255.0U0 0xeth1 127.0.0.00.0.0.0255.0.0.0U 00xlo 0.0.0.0195.44.34.10.0.0.0UG 1 0xeth0 I am also using IP_Masqueradeing to connect a win 95 machine (192.168.1.2) connected on eth1, which is redirecting everything to eth0. What have I done wrong? -- Ross D. Gardler We know What you Want Help with the birth of a java developers centre http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/9694 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Host Unreachable even though it's in the route table
David Wright wrote: On Fri, 26 Sep 1997, Ross Gardler wrote: My ISP has just changed my IP number, gateway and DNS server. I have manually changed the routing information in /etc/init.d/network to reflect the new numbers yet when I ping the gateway I get Destination Host Unreachable. the route -n command gives me the following output... DestinationGatewayGenmaskFlagsMetric RefUseIFace 195.44.34.0 0.0.0.0255.255.255.0 U0 0xeth0 192.168.1.00.0.0.0255.255.255.0U0 0xeth1 127.0.0.00.0.0.0255.0.0.0U 00xlo 0.0.0.0195.44.34.10.0.0.0UG 1 0xeth0 Are you pinging it by number or by name? By number - my DNS isn't working as I can't get to my Gateway. Have you updated resolv.conf as well as init.d/network? Yes. -- David Wright, Open University, Earth Science Department, Milton Keynes MK7 6AA U.K. email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel: +44 1908 653 739 fax: +44 1908 655 151 -- Ross D. Gardler We know What you Want Help with the birth of a java developers centre http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/9694 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
