[Fwd: Re: [LARTC] 2 internal NIC's in the same network]

[Fwd: Re: [LARTC] 2 internal NIC's in the same network]

[Tarek W.]

-----Forwarded Message-----

> From: Tarek W. <tarek@cyberia.net.lb>
> To: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl
> Subject: Re: [LARTC] 2 internal NIC's in the same network
> Date: 26 Nov 2002 09:12:33 -0200
> 
> 
> ur deliverance is by way of echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth{1,2},
> that's what everybody says...however, this is not the whole story, ur
> tryina setup two ips on the same subnet on two separate interfaces... in
> simple routing, the first route to match is taken... so the traffic goes
> out the first interface regardless of the source ip... u need to look
> into source-based routing or "policy routing". read the iproute2 docs.
> 
> On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 11:14, virdzek, roman wrote:
> > hi,
> > i have two internal nics
> > 
> >             at PC1
> >                  
> >     eth1                 eth2
> > 10.0.0.1               10.0.0.2
> > 
> >             |              |
> >             switch 
> >                  |
> >               pc2
> >               eth0
> >             10.0.0.3       
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > and when I ping from pc2 -> PC1:eth2,
> > using tcpdump i see that PC1
> > send reply to (arp who has 10.0.0.2),
> > 10.0.0.2 is at .....eth1.
> > why PC1 send back not proper HW address?
> > how I can force PC1 to say that 10.0.0.2
> > is at eth2?
> 



_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

Re: [Fwd: Re: [LARTC] 2 internal NIC's in the same network]

[Tarek W.]

On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 09:19, Tarek W. wrote:
> -----Forwarded Message-----
> 
> > From: Tarek W. <tarek@cyberia.net.lb>
> > To: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl
> > Subject: Re: [LARTC] 2 internal NIC's in the same network
> > Date: 26 Nov 2002 09:12:33 -0200
> > 
> > 
> > ur deliverance is by way of echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth{1,2},

rather /eth{1,2}/arp_filter

> > that's what everybody says...however, this is not the whole story, ur
> > tryina setup two ips on the same subnet on two separate interfaces... in
> > simple routing, the first route to match is taken... so the traffic goes
> > out the first interface regardless of the source ip... u need to look
> > into source-based routing or "policy routing". read the iproute2 docs.
> > 
> > On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 11:14, virdzek, roman wrote:
> > > hi,
> > > i have two internal nics
> > > 
> > >             at PC1
> > >                  
> > >     eth1                 eth2
> > > 10.0.0.1               10.0.0.2
> > > 
> > >             |              |
> > >             switch 
> > >                  |
> > >               pc2
> > >               eth0
> > >             10.0.0.3       
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > and when I ping from pc2 -> PC1:eth2,
> > > using tcpdump i see that PC1
> > > send reply to (arp who has 10.0.0.2),
> > > 10.0.0.2 is at .....eth1.
> > > why PC1 send back not proper HW address?
> > > how I can force PC1 to say that 10.0.0.2
> > > is at eth2?
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/



_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

Re: [Fwd: Re: [LARTC] 2 internal NIC's in the same network]

[virdzek, roman]

hi,
I have set arp_filter to 1 at both eth at PC1.
then I ping eth2(10.0.0.2) from pc2 (10.0.0.3)
and both eth1 and eth2 answers to arp request
from pc2.

it seems to be, that arp_filter is not the proper solution for me,
i must apply hidden patch from

 http://www.linux-vs.org/~julian/#hidden

as advice to me martin.a.brown.

bye

>>ur deliverance is by way of echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth{1,2},
>>that's what everybody says...however, this is not the whole story, ur
>>tryina setup two ips on the same subnet on two separate interfaces... in
>>simple routing, the first route to match is taken... so the traffic goes
>>out the first interface regardless of the source ip... u need to look
>>into source-based routing or "policy routing". read the iproute2 docs.
>>
>>    
>>
>>    
>>
>>>hi,
>>>i have two internal nics
>>>
>>>            at PC1
>>>                 
>>>    eth1                 eth2
>>>10.0.0.1               10.0.0.2
>>>
>>>            |              |
>>>            switch 
>>>                 |
>>>              pc2
>>>              eth0
>>>            10.0.0.3       
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>and when I ping from pc2 -> PC1:eth2,
>>>using tcpdump i see that PC1
>>>send reply to (arp who has 10.0.0.2),
>>>10.0.0.2 is at .....eth1.
>>>why PC1 send back not proper HW address?
>>>how I can force PC1 to say that 10.0.0.2
>>>is at eth2?
>>>      
>>>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
>http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
>  
>


 



_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

Re: [Fwd: Re: [LARTC] 2 internal NIC's in the same network]

[Tarek W.]

here's my setup on a production server without the hidden patch. and it
works:

# conf begin

[root@slope root]# cat /etc/sysctl.conf | grep arp_filter
net.ipv4.conf.default.arp_filter = 1
[root@slope root]#

[root@slope root]# ip r s all
192.168.x.0/30 dev eth2  proto static  scope link  src 192.168.x.1
192.168.y.0/30 dev eth1  proto static  scope link  src 192.168.y.1
193.227.198.51/29 dev eth4  proto static
172.16.z.0/23 dev eth1  proto static  scope link  src 172.16.z.2
127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
[root@slope root]#

[root@slope root]# ip rule s
0:      from all lookup local
10000:  from 172.16.z.1 lookup ip01
10002:  from 172.16.z.3 lookup ip03
32766:  from all lookup main
32767:  from all lookup default
[root@slope root]#

[root@slope root]# ip r s table ip01
172.16.z.0/23 dev eth0  scope link  src 172.16.2.1
[root@slope root]# ip r s table ip03
172.16.z.0/23 dev eth3  scope link  src 172.16.2.3
[root@slope root]#

#conf end

as u can see, I have 3 ips on the same subnet on 3 separate interfaces,
after testing, the setup above works perfectly without the hidden patch:

[root@carve root]# arp -vn
Address                  HWtype  HWaddress           Flags
Mask            Iface172.16.z.3               ether   00:04:76:DE:u:7B  
C                     eth0
172.16.z.2               ether   00:04:76:DE:v:EC  
C                     eth0
172.16.z.1               ether   00:04:76:DE:w:01  
C                     eth0
Entries: 3      Skipped: 0      Found: 3
[root@carve root]#

On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 09:54, virdzek, roman wrote:
> hi,
> I have set arp_filter to 1 at both eth at PC1.
> then I ping eth2(10.0.0.2) from pc2 (10.0.0.3)
> and both eth1 and eth2 answers to arp request
> from pc2.
> 
> it seems to be, that arp_filter is not the proper solution for me,
> i must apply hidden patch from
> 
>  http://www.linux-vs.org/~julian/#hidden
> 
> as advice to me martin.a.brown.
> 
> bye
> 
> >>ur deliverance is by way of echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/eth{1,2},
> >>that's what everybody says...however, this is not the whole story, ur
> >>tryina setup two ips on the same subnet on two separate interfaces... in
> >>simple routing, the first route to match is taken... so the traffic goes
> >>out the first interface regardless of the source ip... u need to look
> >>into source-based routing or "policy routing". read the iproute2 docs.
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>hi,
> >>>i have two internal nics
> >>>
> >>>            at PC1
> >>>                 
> >>>    eth1                 eth2
> >>>10.0.0.1               10.0.0.2
> >>>
> >>>            |              |
> >>>            switch 
> >>>                 |
> >>>              pc2
> >>>              eth0
> >>>            10.0.0.3       
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>and when I ping from pc2 -> PC1:eth2,
> >>>using tcpdump i see that PC1
> >>>send reply to (arp who has 10.0.0.2),
> >>>10.0.0.2 is at .....eth1.
> >>>why PC1 send back not proper HW address?
> >>>how I can force PC1 to say that 10.0.0.2
> >>>is at eth2?
> >>>      
> >>>
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> >http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
> >  
> >
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/


_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/