[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ssh: no route to host



>>>>> François TOURDE <fra-du@tourde.org> writes:
>>>>> Le 15179ième jour après Epoch, Camaleón écrivait:
>>>>> On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 23:22:57 +0200, François TOURDE wrote:

 >>> No route to host means: "I or some other router on the road can't find
 >>> the hardware associated with the IP given, or the way to reach it".

 >> "No route to host" is a generic message that you can get on very 
 >> different situations.

 > "No route to host" is the consequence of receiving an ICMP "host
 > unreachable" error. It means the ARP resolution failed for reaching
 > the next hop.

	… Or ICMP “host unreachable — admin prohibited filter”?  See,
	e. g., [1].

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490854

 >> For instance, when your ISP has smtp port of your DSL connection closed 
 >> and you try to establish a connection on port 25 via telnet with a remote 
 >> e-mail server, you get a "no route to host" message which basically means 
 >> that you cannot establish a connection with the selected computer on 
 >> choosen port but it does not invlove that computer you are trying to 
 >> reach is "off" or disconnected.

 > When your ISP, like mine, is blocking the xx port, you should receive
 > a "connection timed out" message.

 > That's what I receive:

 > francois@fermat:~$ telnet gmail.com 25
 > Trying 209.85.147.17...
 > telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection timed out

 > But perhaps you didn't receive the same error?

	That's what happens when the packets are dropped, without any
	ICMP message whatsoever.  In iptables(8) terms, compare:

-A FORWARD -d 192.0.2.0/24 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 25 -j DROP 
-A FORWARD -d 192.0.2.0/24 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 25 -j REJECT --reject-with icmp-admin-prohibited 

-- 
FSF associate member #7257


Reply to: