Re: [LARTC] Setting an alias as the "default" IP address,

[Alexander Samad <alex@samad.com.au>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3018 bytes --]

On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 01:30:48PM +1100, Carl Brewer wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello,
> Ive had a poke around through various linux routing documents,
> but haven't found what I think is an elegant solution to a
> routing issue I'm having with a hosting provider and RHEL ES 4 running
> in a VMware VM.
> 
> Here's a diagram of the situation :
> 
> 
>      Default route
>      at provider         our host (A)
>      72.3.230.1/26 ---- 72.3.230.30/26         the VM (B)
>                         192.168.239.1/24 ----- 192.168.239.2/24
>                                                72.3.205.160/32
> 
hi 

maybe I am missign something but can't your just use this

ip r a default via 192.168.239.1 src 72.3.205.160

plus you might need this as well
ip r a 192.168.239.0/24 src 192.168.239.2

You might want to look at bridging, the vm interface sort of becomes the
external interface and teh vm nic driver keeps the traffic different

> 
> I need to have the 72.3.205.160 address be used by the
> linux box B in the VM as its default IP address - ie :
> when traffic goes out from it (originating) it needs
> to go out the 72.3.205.160/32 interface and then
> via the 192.168.239.2 to .1 (default route).
> 
> This setup is because the hosting vendor will only allocate
> us /32 addresses in addition to the base IP address they supply, which
> is fine if we run them as aliases on eth0 on our host, but doesn't work
> so well in a VM (you can't attach a route to a /32 that I'm
> aware of, if you can, I'd *love* to know how!)
> 
> Does anyone here have a suggestion for the neatest way to
> do this?  At present I have the 192.168 network and a static
> route on A pointing the 72.3 address via 192.168.239.2 as that
> seemed to be the easiest way to do it, and inbound traffic
> works fine, but I haven't found a way to make the box in the
> VM use the 72.3.205.160 address as its source when it originates
> traffic, so things like DNS queries etc don't work unless I
> also NAT outgoing traffic on A, which I'd prefer not to do unless
> there's no alternative.  Maybe a bridge between the two?  I don't
> really have a handle on the VMware bridge setup (it's VMware
> workstation 5.0 at the moment). so maybe it's something that
> would be better done in VMware, but I'd prefer to use a purely IP
> routing solution if possible so we're not tied to VMware (at some
> point I want to migrate this to xen or seperate hardware).
> 
> Should I maybe use a tunnel?  I have no experience with tunneling, and
> not really sure of how it would solve the problem
> 
> 
> Any suggestions?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Carl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> =======================
> Vivitec Pty. Ltd.
> Suite 6, 51-55 City Rd.
> Southbank, 3006.
> Ph. +61 3 8626 5626
> Fax +61 3 9682 1000
> =======================
> _______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list
> LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
> 

[-- Attachment #1.2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 143 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc