Re: routing help
"If it works, don't fix it" is my theory.. May be a better way but I don't know it. As Jason
Lim says in his post, let the list know what happens as I'm sure others will have the problem.
Only change I'd consider is using the up command (man interfaces) which would execute your
script after the interface was brought up, instead of on boot. That MIGHT be better. The
modification would look like:
auto eth0 eth1
iface eth0 inet static
address 203.221.41.11
netmask 255.255.255.224
network 203.221.41.0
broadcast 203.221.41.31
up /path/to/your/script
You can also, according to the man page, simply put your script directly into /etc/interfaces,
preceding each command with "up", and the commands would happen in order, ie:
auto eth0 eth1
iface eth0 inet static
address 203.221.41.11
netmask 255.255.255.224
network 203.221.41.0
broadcast 203.221.41.31
up /sbin/route add -net 203.220.47.152/30 eth0
up /sbin/route add default gw 203.220.47.153
up /bin/ping -c1 203.220.238.152
up /sbin/ifconfig eth0 203.221.41.12 netmask 255.255.255.224 broadcast 203.221.41.31
. . . etc
Rod
> Hi Rod,
>
> After a bit more playing and a bit more thinking I finally figured it
> out..I think....
>
> What it looks like is that the router I am using as the gateway
> (203.220.47.153) needed to have its ARP table updated or flushed or
> something. I don't have control over it so I can't be sure. What I
> now have is a script that runs after boot time that looks like:
>
> /sbin/route add -net 203.220.47.152/30 eth0
> /sbin/route add default gw 203.220.47.153
> /bin/ping -c1 203.220.238.152
> /sbin/ifconfig eth0 203.221.41.12 netmask 255.255.255.224 broadcast
> 203.221.41.31
> /sbin/route add -net 203.220.47.152/30 eth0
> /sbin/route add default gw 203.220.47.153
> /bin/ping -c1 203.220.238.152
> /sbin/ifconfig eth0 203.221.41.13 netmask 255.255.255.224 broadcast
> 203.221.41.31
> /sbin/route add -net 203.220.47.152/30 eth0
> /sbin/route add default gw 203.220.47.153
> /bin/ping -c1 203.220.238.152
> /sbin/ifconfig eth0 203.221.41.11 netmask 255.255.255.224 broadcast
> 203.221.41.31
> /sbin/ifconfig eth0:0 203.221.41.12 netmask 255.255.255.224 broadcast
> 203.221.41.31
> /sbin/ifconfig eth0:1 203.221.41.13 netmask 255.255.255.224 broadcast
> 203.221.41.31
> /sbin/route add -net 203.220.47.152/30 eth0
> /sbin/route add default gw 203.220.47.153
> /bin/ping -c1 203.220.238.152
>
> it basically cycles through the ip addresses pinging a host on just the
> other side of the router so it flushes the ARP cache. Does this sound
> correct or am I totally off the track here? Anyway it is all working
> now but I guess I'd like to know if what I had to do was correct or
> not?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Lauchlin
>
> On 26/01/2004, at 2:31 PM, Rod Rodolico wrote:
>
>> Sorry to be vague, but there was a command I remember once when I had
>> this problem before.
>> Seems like I had to do a route add in /network/interfaces. Seems like
>> there is some parameter
>> to an interface that allows you to execute a command after the
>> interface is brought up, and I
>> had to do a route add . . . . to get it to work.
>>
>> However, I'm doing a similar thing, on my server and the only
>> difference is that my netmask is
>> not 255.255.255.255,
>
> mine is 255.255.255.224. The first line in the route output was a host
> entry that I don't seem to need after all.
>
>> which I think is incorrect on yours. Maybe it is the fact that your
>> netmask is not correct? Following are the first two entries in my
>> /etc/network/interfaces, and
>> it works just fine. If I read your output correctly, your netmask
>> should be a .224 instead of
>> the .0 I use (since you only have two IP's).
>>
>> auto eth0
>> iface eth0 inet static
>> address 66.17.131.182
>> netmask 255.255.255.0
>> network 66.17.131.0
>> broadcast 66.17.131.255
>> gateway 66.17.131.1
>>
>> auto eth0:0
>> iface eth0:0 inet static
>> address 66.17.131.183
>> netmask 255.255.255.0
>>
>
> auto eth0 eth1
> iface eth0 inet static
> address 203.221.41.11
> netmask 255.255.255.224
> network 203.221.41.0
> broadcast 203.221.41.31
>
> is what I have.
>
>
>> Of course, I could be 100% wrong, in which case someone here will
>> correct me.
>>
>> Rod
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have an issue with routing that I just can't figure out.
>>>
>>> What I have at the moment is a box set up with an IP and route as
>>> follows (some of the details have
>>>
>>> route -n
>>> Kernel IP routing table
>>> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref
>>> Use
>>> Iface
>>> 203.221.41.11 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0
>>> 0
>>> eth0
>>> 203.220.47.152 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.252 U 0 0
>>> 0
>>> eth0
>>> 203.221.41.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.224 U 0 0
>>> 0
>>> eth0
>>> 0.0.0.0 203.220.47.153 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0
>>> 0
>>> eth0
>>>
>>> eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:05:1C:0B:48:A8
>>> inet addr:203.221.41.11 Bcast:203.221.41.31
>>> Mask:255.255.255.224
>>>
>>>
>>> As can be seen from above the default route is set up to go to a
>>> gateway on a static route.
>>>
>>> What I want to do is add an ip alias to eth0 with an ip address of
>>> 203.221.41.12 and have it route out through the same gateway.
>>>
>>> If I simply do "ifconfig eth0:1 203.221.41.12 netmask 255.255.255.224
>>> broadcast 203.221.41.3" I can ping the IP address from the machine
>>> that is on the same switch (e.g. from 203.221.41.1) but I can not ping
>>> or trace to the ip aliased interface. I have searched around on google
>>> but can't seem to find what I am doing wrong!
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
--
Media Ethics is an oxymoron, much like Jumbo Shrimp and Microsoft Works. Not to mention NT
Security
Reply to: