Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
>On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Mike Stupak wrote:
>
>
>
>>routing tables i dont know much about so speak slowly and clearly...
>>both machines seem to have 2 entries, the loopback and "default" (the
>>router is the gateway for the default, genmask is all 0, and flags are
>>UG). im guessing thats the problem?
>>
>>
>
>Normally you have three..
>
>loopback
>local network
>default
>
>and both the loopback and local network routes are set up automatically
>when the loopback and local network interfaces are brought up.
>
>but if the default route was accepted then most likely everything is fine,
>and the fact that ping works supports this, but your tcpdumps clearly show
>that there is something seriously wrong with the traffic A->B.
>
>
>Maybe the netmask is set wrongly on A or a similar error?
>
>Regards
>Henrik
>
>
IT'S FIXED!
some more investigation reveled that machine B had the local network
route entry but machine A did not. invoking:
route add -net 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 dev eth0
seemed to fix the problem. thanks for all the help.
-mike
Received on Sat Dec 06 2003 - 16:34:11 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Thu Jan 01 2004 - 12:00:06 MST