Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 10:10:57 +0200 From: Wim Livens <livensw@rc.bel.alcatel.be> To: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bug in ip_forward() ? Message-ID: <19990720101057.D1676@rc.bel.alcatel.be> In-Reply-To: <37937846.55C1867E@softweyr.com>; from Wes Peters on Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 01:11:02PM -0600 References: <19990719172546.C1676@rc.bel.alcatel.be> <37937846.55C1867E@softweyr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 01:11:02PM -0600, Wes Peters wrote: > > +------+ +------+ +------+ +------+ > > | |4.2 4.1| |2.1 2.2| |5.1 5.2| | > > |btm22t|---------|btm22q|---------|btm22r|---------|btm22u| > > | | | | | | | | > > +------+ +------+ +------+ +------+ > > > > And this is what I do: > > > > btm22t# ping 192.168.5.2 > > ok, it works... > > btm22q# route delete -net 192.168.5.0 -netmask 255.255.255.252 192.168.2.2 > > ok, ping stops. > > btm22q# route add -net 192.168.5.0 -netmask 255.255.255.252 192.168.2.2 > > ping doesn't work > > And it shouldn't, you haven't given it an appropriate route. From route(8): > > The other commands have the following syntax: > > route [-n] command [-net | -host] destination gateway > > where destination is the destination host or network, gateway is the > next-hop intermediary via which packets should be routed. > > There's the important part right there: gateway is the *next-hop* intermediary > via which packets should be routed. Note that the ping is done from btm22t while the route is deleted/added on btm22q. (I've ommited the 192.168 prefix in the addresses in the figure). Now, I think I did specify a correct next-hop, namely 192.168.2.2, which is a local destination for btm22q. Thanks anyway, I should have been more clear. Wim. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990720101057.D1676>