From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Segree, Gareth" Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 16:57:54 +0000 Subject: RE: [LARTC] Serious Routing problem Message-Id: List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lartc@vger.kernel.org [128.187.1.1] gw none [128.187.2.1] gw none __________________[eth1-- Server -- eth2]__________________ / \ 24-port Hub 1 24 port Hub 2 +-----------+ +-----------+ +-----------+ +-----------+ /\______________[eth1-- Linux Firewall --eth2]__________________/\ / [128.187.3.1] [128.187.4.1] \ [clients1] [clients2] 128.187.3.0/24 gw eth1 128.187.4.0/24 gw eth2 I want clients1 to be able to reach eth2 on server [128.187.2.1] if eth1 on Server goes down and visa versa. Does this explain better. -----Original Message----- From: Julian Anastasov [mailto:ja@ssi.bg] Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2002 2:05 PM To: Segree, Gareth Cc: 'lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl' Subject: RE: [LARTC] Serious Routing problem Hello, On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, Segree, Gareth wrote: > > Well, do you have picture of this setup: wires, hosts, hubs, IPs, > > Subnets. It will help for selecting the right solution. Is the problem > > that rp_filter drops the packets? > No I can ping both hosts and server from the firewall . > > I thought that if you created host routes on the firewall and enable > ip_forwarding thats all that would be needed. Not so easy if you connect one Linux box to another host by using 2 or more devices.... ping can work because by default selects as src IP the preferred source address to the targat host. But from the information provided I assume you have a problem with talks between different subnets. No? At least, I don't have a clear picture of your setup which is essential step before continuing further. Regards -- Julian Anastasov _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/