On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 02:50:06PM -0800, Ross Simpson wrote:> Hello, > > I posted here a couple of weeks ago with problems trying to specify and use > multiple gateways. > > Got lots of good advise, but I had a little OS trouble. > So I''ve finally upgraded to 2.4.9, and made sure that the correct options > are compiled in (adv. router, policy routing, etc.)Can you draw a picture of your situation, and where exactly you entered the commands you show?> IP to forward to). I would like incoming requests to be serviced, and then > returned on the gateway it came in on. 10.4.44.1 is currently the default > gw, and all packets coming in are leaving via it. 10.4.44.2 is the other > router. > 10.4.44.11 and .12 are the two IPs (one virtual) for the linux box. > > I added the rule: > ip rule add to 10.4.44.11/24 dev eth0 table speedI think you should change ''to'' to ''from''. If that doesn''t help, check the mac address of packets! A packet that is routed is only sent to a mac address, the destination IP address isn''t changed! Regards, bert -- http://www.PowerDNS.com Versatile DNS Software & Services http://www.tk the dot in .tk Netherlabs BV / Rent-a-Nerd.nl - Nerd Available - Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control: http://ds9a.nl/lartc
On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 03:17:47PM -0800, Ross Simpson wrote:> Bert, > > Here''s a little diagram:Ok - that helps a *lot*. I sometimes feel as if the esteemed readers of our list think that we are clairvoyant!> > I N T E R N E T > > / \ > > ------------- ------------- > > | 10.4.44.1 | | 10.4.44.2 | > > | lucent | | speed | > > ------------- ------------- > > port-fw 10.4.44.12:80 port-fw 10.4.44.11:80 > > \ / > > \ / > > | > > eth0 > > -------------- > > | 10.4.44.11 | > > | 10.4.44.12 | > > | linux | > > -------------- > > So basically what I want is that for packets coming in from ''speed'' to use > speed as the outgoing gateway. Looking at incoming packets on the linux > box, I see that when the router does port forwarding, it doesn''t rewrite any > addresses -- the packets are still from the remote client and destined for > the linux box.Ok.> The reason I had ''to'' in my rule (and two IPs on the linux box) is so I > could differentiate traffic from each router -- traffic going to 10.4.44.11 > has to be from the 10.4.44.2 router. The ''from'' address was always > different (the remote client).That''s still the case isn''t it? I think your linux box needs this: ip rule add from 10.4.44.11 table speed ip rule add from 10.4.44.12 table lucent ip route add default via 10.4.44.1 dev eth0 table speed ip route add default via 10.4.44.1 dev eth0 table lucent Regards, bert -- http://www.PowerDNS.com Versatile DNS Software & Services http://www.tk the dot in .tk Netherlabs BV / Rent-a-Nerd.nl - Nerd Available - Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control: http://ds9a.nl/lartc
Hello, I posted here a couple of weeks ago with problems trying to specify and use multiple gateways. Got lots of good advise, but I had a little OS trouble. So I''ve finally upgraded to 2.4.9, and made sure that the correct options are compiled in (adv. router, policy routing, etc.) Here''s a quick summary of my goal: I have two DSL routers connected to my linux box. Packets are port-forwarded from each router to an IP on the linux box (each has its own IP to forward to). I would like incoming requests to be serviced, and then returned on the gateway it came in on. 10.4.44.1 is currently the default gw, and all packets coming in are leaving via it. 10.4.44.2 is the other router. 10.4.44.11 and .12 are the two IPs (one virtual) for the linux box. I added the rule: ip rule add to 10.4.44.11/24 dev eth0 table speed and the route: ip route add default via 10.4.44.2 dev eth0 table speed ip route flush cache No errors, but if I look at packets (with ethereal), I see the destination of all outgoing packets is 10.4.44.1. Now the above rule and route worked fine on another system -- packets went where they were supposed to. So my question is, is there a way to test the basic functionality of the advanced routing features? I tried forwarding all outgoing packets to 10.4.44.2, and that had no effect either. I think that I''m either missing a step, or that something is configured wrong. Any help''s appreciated. thanks! Ross
Bert, Here''s a little diagram:> > I N T E R N E T > / \ > ------------- ------------- > | 10.4.44.1 | | 10.4.44.2 | > | lucent | | speed | > ------------- ------------- > port-fw 10.4.44.12:80 port-fw 10.4.44.11:80 > \ / > \ / > \ / > ----------- > | hub | > ----------- > | > | > | > eth0 > -------------- > | 10.4.44.11 | > | 10.4.44.12 | > | linux | > --------------So basically what I want is that for packets coming in from ''speed'' to use speed as the outgoing gateway. Looking at incoming packets on the linux box, I see that when the router does port forwarding, it doesn''t rewrite any addresses -- the packets are still from the remote client and destined for the linux box. The reason I had ''to'' in my rule (and two IPs on the linux box) is so I could differentiate traffic from each router -- traffic going to 10.4.44.11 has to be from the 10.4.44.2 router. The ''from'' address was always different (the remote client). I thought using mac addresses would be easier, but last time I asked, I was told IPs were easier ;) I have looked at the adv-routing howto and searched newsgroups, but haven''t found a way to specify rules and routes with mac addresses. I tried this: ip rule add from 00:01:02:03:04:05 dev eth0 table speed but got an error: "an inet prefix is expected rather than "00:01:02:03:04:05". Is there an option to ip that signifies addresses are mac addresses? thanks for the help! Ross -----Original Message----- From: lartc-admin@mailman.ds9a.nl [mailto:lartc-admin@mailman.ds9a.nl]On Behalf Of bert hubert Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 1:57 PM To: Ross Simpson Cc: Lartc@Mailman. Ds9a. Nl Subject: Re: [LARTC] adv. routing features not working? On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 02:50:06PM -0800, Ross Simpson wrote:> Hello, > > I posted here a couple of weeks ago with problems trying to specify anduse> multiple gateways. > > Got lots of good advise, but I had a little OS trouble. > So I''ve finally upgraded to 2.4.9, and made sure that the correct options > are compiled in (adv. router, policy routing, etc.)Can you draw a picture of your situation, and where exactly you entered the commands you show?> IP to forward to). I would like incoming requests to be serviced, andthen> returned on the gateway it came in on. 10.4.44.1 is currently the default > gw, and all packets coming in are leaving via it. 10.4.44.2 is the other > router. > 10.4.44.11 and .12 are the two IPs (one virtual) for the linux box. > > I added the rule: > ip rule add to 10.4.44.11/24 dev eth0 table speedI think you should change ''to'' to ''from''. If that doesn''t help, check the mac address of packets! A packet that is routed is only sent to a mac address, the destination IP address isn''t changed! Regards, bert -- http://www.PowerDNS.com Versatile DNS Software & Services http://www.tk the dot in .tk Netherlabs BV / Rent-a-Nerd.nl - Nerd Available - Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control: http://ds9a.nl/lartc _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/lartc/
Bert, I think that I''ve just spent so much time staring at this that I think everyone else knows what I know :) Your suggestions work great (with one minor change).. thank you! But... I don''t understand why.> ip rule add from 10.4.44.11 table speed > ip rule add from 10.4.44.12 table lucentWhat context is the ''from'' in? It seems to me that the linux box would never see packets from either of those two addresses (.11 and .12). Maybe to them, but not from them.> ip route add default via 10.4.44.1 dev eth0 table speed > ip route add default via 10.4.44.1 dev eth0 table lucentI changed the gw on the speed entry to 10.4.44.2, which is correct for that router. Thanks again for all the help.. Ross -----Original Message----- From: lartc-admin@mailman.ds9a.nl [mailto:lartc-admin@mailman.ds9a.nl]On Behalf Of bert hubert Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 2:23 PM To: Ross Simpson Cc: Lartc@Mailman. Ds9a. Nl Subject: Re: [LARTC] adv. routing features not working? On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 03:17:47PM -0800, Ross Simpson wrote:> Bert, > > Here''s a little diagram:Ok - that helps a *lot*. I sometimes feel as if the esteemed readers of our list think that we are clairvoyant!> > I N T E R N E T > > / \ > > ------------- ------------- > > | 10.4.44.1 | | 10.4.44.2 | > > | lucent | | speed | > > ------------- ------------- > > port-fw 10.4.44.12:80 port-fw 10.4.44.11:80 > > \ / > > \ / > > | > > eth0 > > -------------- > > | 10.4.44.11 | > > | 10.4.44.12 | > > | linux | > > -------------- > > So basically what I want is that for packets coming in from ''speed'' to use > speed as the outgoing gateway. Looking at incoming packets on the linux > box, I see that when the router does port forwarding, it doesn''t rewriteany> addresses -- the packets are still from the remote client and destined for > the linux box.Ok.> The reason I had ''to'' in my rule (and two IPs on the linux box) is so I > could differentiate traffic from each router -- traffic going to10.4.44.11> has to be from the 10.4.44.2 router. The ''from'' address was always > different (the remote client).That''s still the case isn''t it? I think your linux box needs this: ip rule add from 10.4.44.11 table speed ip rule add from 10.4.44.12 table lucent ip route add default via 10.4.44.1 dev eth0 table speed ip route add default via 10.4.44.1 dev eth0 table lucent Regards, bert -- http://www.PowerDNS.com Versatile DNS Software & Services http://www.tk the dot in .tk Netherlabs BV / Rent-a-Nerd.nl - Nerd Available - Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control: http://ds9a.nl/lartc _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/lartc/
On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 04:23:54PM -0800, Ross Simpson wrote:> Your suggestions work great (with one minor change).. thank you! > But... I don''t understand why. > > > ip rule add from 10.4.44.11 table speed > > ip rule add from 10.4.44.12 table lucent > > What context is the ''from'' in? It seems to me that the linux box would > never see packets from either of those two addresses (.11 and .12). Maybe > to them, but not from them.This is *outgoing* routing! So in this case, ''from'' looks at the source address.> > ip route add default via 10.4.44.1 dev eth0 table speed > > ip route add default via 10.4.44.1 dev eth0 table lucent > > I changed the gw on the speed entry to 10.4.44.2, which is correct for that > router.I was just testing to see if you were paying attention :-)> Thanks again for all the help..Np. Regards, bert -- http://www.PowerDNS.com Versatile DNS Software & Services http://www.tk the dot in .tk Netherlabs BV / Rent-a-Nerd.nl - Nerd Available - Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control: http://ds9a.nl/lartc