From: Gabor Gludovatz <ggabor@sopron.hu>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [LARTC] routing bug?
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 18:16:30 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-lartc-104282748210745@msgid-missing> (raw)
Hello,
I have set up the following route:
ip rule add prio 20 table test
ip route add default table test proto static \
nexthop dev eth0 via 80.98.79.254 weight 1 \
nexthop dev ppp0 via 62.112.192.134 weight 1
[root@roadrunner ~ ] # ip route get 195.228.120.3
195.228.120.3 via 62.112.192.134 dev ppp0 src 62.112.220.27
cache mtu 1454 advmss 1414
then I try to telnet to the ssh port of 195.228.120.3
In the meantime:
[root@roadrunner ~ ] # tcpdump -i ppp0 host 195.228.120.3
tcpdump: listening on ppp0
22:59:44.177458 80.98.79.17.35279 > 195.228.120.3.ssh: S 3019355410:3019355410(0) win 5656 <mss 1414,sackOK,timestamp 550913 0,nop,wscale 0> (DF) [tos 0x10]
[...repeated for 4 times...]
23:00:13.299255 195.228.120.3.ssh > 62.112.220.27.35251: P 2635459978:2635460026(48) ack 2627843263 win 15532 <nop,nop,timestamp 383251 514492> (DF)
23:00:29.174513 80.98.79.17.35279 > 195.228.120.3.ssh: S 3019355410:3019355410(0) win 5656 <mss 1414,sackOK,timestamp 555413 0,nop,wscale 0> (DF) [tos 0x10]
(Notice that the source address (80.98.79.17) belongs to eth0 not to ppp0)
At the same time I ran a tcpdump on the eth0 interface as well and it had
gotten no packets from 195.228.120.3 at all.
The packet that came at 23:00:13 is rather strange. I do not know, how did
it find out where should it send its packet back if my own packet's source
address was wrong.
(After I had repeated the operation several times, I was not able to catch
this packet again. It might had been a stale packet from a previous
connection, I don't know.)
After all of this:
[root@roadrunner /stor/home/ggabor ] # ip route get 195.228.120.3
195.228.120.3 via 62.112.192.134 dev ppp0 src 62.112.220.27
cache mtu 1454 advmss 1414
Can this be a bug or did I make a mistake somewhere?
During the operation there had been no rules in iptables' tables.
If a program tries to use eth0 with the same routing settings, there is no
problem.
thanks in advance
--
Gabor Gludovatz <ggabor@sopron.hu> - Phone: +36 (20) 9 109 129
http://gludo.sopron.hu/ * http://gludo.sopron.hu/gpg.txt
GPG fingerprint: 8D0C 6AE8 5875 751E 5122-1DAE 4990 1A4E BC2E C8B9
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
reply other threads:[~2003-01-17 18:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=marc-lartc-104282748210745@msgid-missing \
--to=ggabor@sopron.hu \
--cc=lartc@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox