Re: SSH Access Issue
On 3/26/17, Cindy-Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/26/17, Philippe LeCavalier <support@plecavalier.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017, 17:52 <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 06:56:03PM +0000, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
>>>
>>> > Nevermind. I changed the forward to another box and can't get to it
>>> either
>>> > so it has to be something in the firewall capturing the connection
>>> despite
>>> > it showing a clean passthru.
>>>
>>> I see you found a clue to follow. One very helpful tool in those cases
>>> is the option -v (verbose) on the client:
>>>
>>> ssh -v user@host.domain
>>>
>>> It shows you details of the handshake as it proceeds (try first on a
>>> working connection, to get an idea of what to expect). More "-v"
>>> increase the verbosity.
>>>
>>>
>> Turns out the box had a second default gateway by mistake, mine of
>> course.
>> I guess I forgot I manually added the default gateway when the box was in
>> my lab. As it turns out the clue was irrelevant but talking things out
>> here
>> did somehow lead my the the right clue.
>
>
> This sounds like it *might* be something that I've mentioned at least
> once, possibly twice, within seeming appropriate threads.
>
> In the case I'm thinking, it's about manually adding multiple lines to
> a file that I'm not completely remembering just now. Gut is saying
> it's /etc/network/interfaces. Mine's almost empty so I don't have an
> example to confirm that.
>
> What I encountered wasn't about declaring different values for
> gateway, either. For whatever reasons due to innate [functionality],
> it becomes a fail even if you declare the same gateway value for that
> line within each new, separate block of declarations. Success is found
> by declaring it once then omitting that line within any other new
> blocks added over time.
>
> Between my setup and cognition, I've never had anything stable enough
> to test if it matters which block that gateway is declared. I've
> wondered if it matters that it be in the first block, or if it just
> needs to show up somewhere in that file. I was consciously putting it
> in the first block because that seemed to be the *logical* thing to do
> k/t having touched on programming 20 years ago at a local tech school.
I literally HATE when this happens. Forgot something then remembered
as the first email was blipping off the screen. I also wanted to
wonder out loud if it's possible to teach programs that touch on that
to complain specifically about that duplication being the cause of
failure.
That error would save users a lot of hair pulling. I only ever
stumbled on that tidbit completely by accident because I had hit up a
BUNCH of different website help lists while trying to get my setup to
function here. My guess is that I would/will not likely recall that
being a potential check point during potential future moments of
failure, too. It only ever comes to mind now when someone writes the
right keywords that trigger the memory of that tip. :)
Cindy :)
--
Cindy-Sue Causey
Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA
* runs with duct tape *
Reply to: