major routing problem, trying to route 192.x.x.x and 10.x.x.x HELP !!!

major routing problem, trying to route 192.x.x.x and 10.x.x.x HELP !!!

Post by CyberPunk_100 » Sat, 07 Sep 2002 11:54:14



ok ive got two networks 192.168.0.x and 10.42.42.x and im simply trying to
join them my router is at 192.168.0.1 i need both to be able to get online
and accsess the internet as well as being able to accsess each other ie
192.168.0.25---->10.42.42.55

a rough diagram [Cable]----[Router]----[switch for 192
clinets]----[router]---[switch for 10.42.42.x clients]

if i do somethign like

route add 10.42.42.5 eth1

i can reach the other network but i cant get online eaven when trying to add
route add defualt gw 192.168.0.1

HELP please im gettng no responces and ive read just about every artical i
can find.

 
 
 

major routing problem, trying to route 192.x.x.x and 10.x.x.x HELP !!!

Post by nick haddo » Sat, 07 Sep 2002 18:44:08



> ok ive got two networks 192.168.0.x and 10.42.42.x and im simply trying to
> join them my router is at 192.168.0.1 i need both to be able to get online
> and accsess the internet as well as being able to accsess each other ie
> 192.168.0.25---->10.42.42.55

> a rough diagram [Cable]----[Router]----[switch for 192
> clinets]----[router]---[switch for 10.42.42.x clients]

> if i do somethign like

> route add 10.42.42.5 eth1

> i can reach the other network but i cant get online eaven when trying to add
> route add defualt gw 192.168.0.1

> HELP please im gettng no responces and ive read just about every artical i
> can find.

If you are not using any routing protocols, like RIP or OSPF, then you
are going to have to put statics in.
Are these routers linux boxes with two nic's , have you switched ip
forwarding on.
echo "1" >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ipforward
By default routers know how to route to directly connected networks,
check the routing tables of the routers. Now the internet connection,
what addresses does it allow through? Can you do an ascii diagram with
all the IP's shown.
Are you using NAT anywhere?

Does the first router have a static route that tells it how to get to
the second LAN?

There are many potential issues here, more info please

Codfather

 
 
 

major routing problem, trying to route 192.x.x.x and 10.x.x.x HELP !!!

Post by CyberPunk_100 » Sun, 08 Sep 2002 00:23:32


Ah thank you for your reply im a compleaty Newbie with linux, ok yes i do
have NAT on the main router connected to the cable modem it is using the
floppy distro FloppyFW (floppyfw.org) i did also have the second router
setup in the same way, the thing is i just basicly want to avoid nat in the
second router in order to be able to accsess teh machines directly, basicly
the reason for having a second router is to enforce firewaling and
packetshaping on that network as my main router dosnet support it and if i
were to upgrade i would lose my H323 compatiblity, therefore i haveopted to
use a comrectial linux like red hat or slackware to route between the two.

Destination    Gateway        Genmask                    Flags    Metric
Ref    Use    Iface
192.168.0.1  *                   255.255.255.255        UH      0
0        0       eth0
192.168.0.2  *                   255.255.255.255        UH      0
0        0       eth0
192.168.0.7  *                   255.255.255.0            UH      0
0        0       eth1
192.168.0.0  *                   255.255.255.0            U         0
0        0       eth1
192.168.0.0  *                   255.255.255.0            U         0
0        0       eth0
defualt            192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0                        UG      1
0        0       eth1

i laso have proxy arp turned on for both eth1 and eth0 in this configuration

if i use this i can ping 192.168.0.7 and 192.168.0.1 but i cnat get online
with it.

from this what choices do i have and what should i explore ?


Quote:> > ok ive got two networks 192.168.0.x and 10.42.42.x and im simply trying
to
> > join them my router is at 192.168.0.1 i need both to be able to get
online
> > and accsess the internet as well as being able to accsess each other ie
> > 192.168.0.25---->10.42.42.55

> > a rough diagram [Cable]----[Router]----[switch for 192
> > clinets]----[router]---[switch for 10.42.42.x clients]

> > if i do somethign like

> > route add 10.42.42.5 eth1

> > i can reach the other network but i cant get online eaven when trying to
add
> > route add defualt gw 192.168.0.1

> > HELP please im gettng no responces and ive read just about every artical
i
> > can find.

> If you are not using any routing protocols, like RIP or OSPF, then you
> are going to have to put statics in.
> Are these routers linux boxes with two nic's , have you switched ip
> forwarding on.
> echo "1" >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ipforward
> By default routers know how to route to directly connected networks,
> check the routing tables of the routers. Now the internet connection,
> what addresses does it allow through? Can you do an ascii diagram with
> all the IP's shown.
> Are you using NAT anywhere?

> Does the first router have a static route that tells it how to get to
> the second LAN?

> There are many potential issues here, more info please

> Codfather

 
 
 

major routing problem, trying to route 192.x.x.x and 10.x.x.x HELP !!!

Post by nick haddo » Tue, 10 Sep 2002 18:22:32



> Ah thank you for your reply im a compleaty Newbie with linux, ok yes i do
> have NAT on the main router connected to the cable modem it is using the
> floppy distro FloppyFW (floppyfw.org) i did also have the second router
> setup in the same way, the thing is i just basicly want to avoid nat in the
> second router in order to be able to accsess teh machines directly, basicly
> the reason for having a second router is to enforce firewaling and
> packetshaping on that network as my main router dosnet support it and if i
> were to upgrade i would lose my H323 compatiblity, therefore i haveopted to
> use a comrectial linux like red hat or slackware to route between the two.

> Destination    Gateway        Genmask                    Flags    Metric
> Ref    Use    Iface
> 192.168.0.1  *                   255.255.255.255        UH      0
> 0        0       eth0
> 192.168.0.2  *                   255.255.255.255        UH      0
> 0        0       eth0
> 192.168.0.7  *                   255.255.255.0            UH      0
> 0        0       eth1
> 192.168.0.0  *                   255.255.255.0            U         0
> 0        0       eth1
> 192.168.0.0  *                   255.255.255.0            U         0
> 0        0       eth0
> defualt            192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0                        UG      1
> 0        0       eth1

> i laso have proxy arp turned on for both eth1 and eth0 in this configuration

> if i use this i can ping 192.168.0.7 and 192.168.0.1 but i cnat get online
> with it.

> from this what choices do i have and what should i explore ?


[snip]
Does the internet connected router know how to route packets back to
the second LAN? If that router can't deal with IP packets with a
source address of 10.x.x.x, then it will never be able to route. If it
works for LAN 1, then you can either NAT the second LAN (10.x.x.x) to
a first LAN address (192.x.x.x) or make the internet connected router
know what to do with packets that it receives from the second LAN.
If you use iptables, then using NAT is reasonably straight forward. To
get your router configured , then RTFM.

Codfather

 
 
 

1. Routing Linux 192.168.10.x network to Dlink router on 192.168.1.x network

8/5/2006, 1:23AM

Hi,

Thanks for taking the time to shine some light!

I have a Linux Redhat 7.2 box on a 192.168.10.x  network and I have
clients that need to connect also connected to the same Dlink router
which is at 192.168.1.1

All my boxes are physically plugged into the D-link router so they are
all on the same physical network.

I heard that if all machines are on the same router, then all one has
to do is add the odd man out network to the routing page, which I did:

Enable : Yes
Destination IP 192.168.10.100
Netmask : 255.255.255.0
Gateway : 192.168.1.1
Interface :LAN
Metric :  1

My router is on 192.168.1.1
Linux box is on 192.168.10.100
clients on 192.168.1.100

I don't want to be sloppy and change the subnet mask to 255.255.0.0

Shouldn't this work? But my Linux box at 192.168.10.100 can't ping my
D-link router at 192.168.1.1

I could probably do a "route add" command on the Linux box to be able
to ping the D-link, but shouldn't the router, since it's on the same
physical network, see the ping from anything on it's network? Yes...it
should drop it from a different subnet...I know....but since I added
the route in the D-link routing table, shouldn't it not only see it but
route it and/or respond to it?

I can ping the D-link 192.168.1.1 from my boxes on the 192.168.1.x
network.

I don't want to have to add "route print" statements on all my boxes. I
thought this is what routers were for...connecting different subnets?

Thanks for your input!

Thanks,

The "Route Guy"

2. ipchains: udp ports 137/138 in mixed linux/windoze environment

3. Sunscreen routing 192.168.1.0/24 and 172.16.0.0/16 problem

4. dlopen

5. routing 192.168.0.1 to a class c network

6. I need help converting a Cisco PIX command to an iptables chain.

7. route problem: route forgot to specify route netmask.

8. Network monitors

9. Routing problem with source-based routing and routing packets back to sender machine.

10. From:192.168.0.101 TO:192.168.0.xxx VIA:192.168.2.1 ?

11. Routing PPP<->Ethernet on a private 192.168.0.* net

12. connect via telnet a server(192.168.10.x) from the outside.

13. 192.168.1.10:80 has no virtual hosts (?)