SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable? - Help

This is a discussion on SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable? - Help ; Hi all, I'm a total idiot when it comes to stuff like this, so maybe someone cal make it clear for me. I am running Mandrake 9.2 with 2 NIC's in the box. Here is my output of 'ifconfig': eth0 ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable?

  1. SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable?

    Hi all,

    I'm a total idiot when it comes to stuff like this, so maybe someone
    cal make it clear for me.

    I am running Mandrake 9.2 with 2 NIC's in the box. Here is my output
    of 'ifconfig':

    eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:01:03:2B:9D:88
    inet addr:192.168.1.110 Bcast:192.168.1.255
    Mask:255.255.255.0
    UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
    RX packets:877227 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:1 frame:0
    TX packets:917228 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
    collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
    RX bytes:104595011 (99.7 Mb) TX bytes:382148618 (364.4 Mb)
    Interrupt:10 Base address:0xa400

    eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:50:04:6E:54:1A
    inet addr:192.168.0.110 Bcast:192.168.0.255
    Mask:255.255.255.0
    UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
    RX packets:6682958 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
    TX packets:6392868 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
    collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
    RX bytes:4220660546 (4025.1 Mb) TX bytes:2403758195 (2292.4
    Mb)
    Interrupt:11 Base address:0xa800


    Now, I issue any of the following ROUTE ADD commands with no errors:

    1) route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth0
    2) route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth1
    3) route add default gw 192.168.1.1 eth1

    However, if I issue this command:
    1) route add default gw 192.168.1.1 eth1
    SIOCADDRT: Network is unreachable

    Why does it give me an error message? Also, why can I cross routes /
    subnets without any problems?? If I issue a route statement that ties
    the 0.1 subnet to eth0, why does it work??? eth0 is part of the 1.1
    subnet......

    Can anyone please explain these things?

    Thanks,

    Arthur

  2. Re: SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable?

    Arthur wrote:
    > Hi all,
    >
    > I'm a total idiot when it comes to stuff like this, so maybe someone
    > cal make it clear for me.
    >
    > I am running Mandrake 9.2 with 2 NIC's in the box. Here is my output
    > of 'ifconfig':
    >
    > eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:01:03:2B:9D:88
    > inet addr:192.168.1.110 Bcast:192.168.1.255
    > Mask:255.255.255.0
    > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
    > RX packets:877227 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:1 frame:0
    > TX packets:917228 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
    > collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
    > RX bytes:104595011 (99.7 Mb) TX bytes:382148618 (364.4 Mb)
    > Interrupt:10 Base address:0xa400
    >
    > eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:50:04:6E:54:1A
    > inet addr:192.168.0.110 Bcast:192.168.0.255
    > Mask:255.255.255.0
    > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
    > RX packets:6682958 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
    > TX packets:6392868 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
    > collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
    > RX bytes:4220660546 (4025.1 Mb) TX bytes:2403758195 (2292.4
    > Mb)
    > Interrupt:11 Base address:0xa800
    >
    >
    > Now, I issue any of the following ROUTE ADD commands with no errors:
    >
    > 1) route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth0
    > 2) route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth1
    > 3) route add default gw 192.168.1.1 eth1


    You should generally only have one default gateway (the one that leads
    out the internet)

    2 is clashing terribly with 1 as well. An appropriate route is added for
    the attached subnet when the interface is brought up.

    You only need to add one the gateway (how you do this at boot will vary
    depending on your distribution).

    --
    Cameron Kerr
    cameron.kerr@paradise.net.nz : http://nzgeeks.org/cameron/
    Empowered by Perl!

  3. Re: SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable?

    Cameron,

    I'm not quite sure I understand your post. If I have 2 NIC's in my
    Mandrake 9.2 box, then shouldn't I have 2 routes?

    It sounds like my assumption is correct, that I should not cross
    subnets. If that is the case, then how come I can get away with #1
    with no errors?

    At any rate, again, if I have 2 NIC's, then should I not have 2
    routes?

    Arthur


    Cameron Kerr wrote in message news:<401f0be1@news.maxnet.co.nz>...
    > Arthur wrote:
    > > Hi all,
    > >
    > > I'm a total idiot when it comes to stuff like this, so maybe someone
    > > cal make it clear for me.
    > >
    > > I am running Mandrake 9.2 with 2 NIC's in the box. Here is my output
    > > of 'ifconfig':
    > >
    > > eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:01:03:2B:9D:88
    > > inet addr:192.168.1.110 Bcast:192.168.1.255
    > > Mask:255.255.255.0
    > > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
    > > RX packets:877227 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:1 frame:0
    > > TX packets:917228 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
    > > collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
    > > RX bytes:104595011 (99.7 Mb) TX bytes:382148618 (364.4 Mb)
    > > Interrupt:10 Base address:0xa400
    > >
    > > eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:50:04:6E:54:1A
    > > inet addr:192.168.0.110 Bcast:192.168.0.255
    > > Mask:255.255.255.0
    > > UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
    > > RX packets:6682958 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
    > > TX packets:6392868 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
    > > collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
    > > RX bytes:4220660546 (4025.1 Mb) TX bytes:2403758195 (2292.4
    > > Mb)
    > > Interrupt:11 Base address:0xa800
    > >
    > >
    > > Now, I issue any of the following ROUTE ADD commands with no errors:
    > >
    > > 1) route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth0
    > > 2) route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth1
    > > 3) route add default gw 192.168.1.1 eth1

    >
    > You should generally only have one default gateway (the one that leads
    > out the internet)
    >
    > 2 is clashing terribly with 1 as well. An appropriate route is added for
    > the attached subnet when the interface is brought up.
    >
    > You only need to add one the gateway (how you do this at boot will vary
    > depending on your distribution).


  4. Re: SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable?

    Arthur wrote:
    > Hi all,
    >
    > I'm a total idiot when it comes to stuff like this, so maybe someone
    > cal make it clear for me.
    >
    > I am running Mandrake 9.2 with 2 NIC's in the box. Here is my output
    > of 'ifconfig':
    >
    > eth0 inet addr:192.168.1.110 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
    >
    > eth1 inet addr:192.168.0.110 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
    >
    > Now, I issue any of the following ROUTE ADD commands with no errors:
    >
    > 1) route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth0
    > 2) route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth1
    > 3) route add default gw 192.168.1.1 eth1


    There should only be one default (gateway) route. If your computer
    wanted to send a packet to eg. 64.38.34.49 then which (default) route
    should it use?

    Without more information about what you want to do, I'm thinking you're
    wanting something like these:

    route add -net 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.1.1 eth0
    so that all packets to the network 192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0 is sent
    from eth0, through the gateway 192.168.1.1

    route add -net 192.168.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.0.1 eth1
    so that all packets to the network 192.168.0.0/255.255.255.0 is sent
    from eth1, through the gateway 192.168.0.1

    route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth1
    so that the default is to send the packets (ie. all packets to
    destinations other than the above rules) from eth1, through the gateway
    192.168.0.1.

    I recommend you work out what you want to do and have a thorough read of
    'man route'.

    --
    Ben M.

    ----------------
    What are Software Patents for?
    To protect the small enterprise from bigger companies.

    What do Software Patents do?
    In its current form, they protect only companies with
    big legal departments as they:
    a.) Patent everything no matter how general
    b.) Sue everybody. Even if the patent can be argued
    invalid, small companies can ill-afford the
    typical $500k cost of a law-suit (not to mention
    years of harassment).

    Don't let them take away your right to program
    whatever you like. Make a stand on Software Patents
    before its too late.

    Read about the ongoing battle at http://swpat.ffii.org/
    ----------------


  5. Re: SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable?

    Hi Ben,

    Thanks for replying. Actually, since I have 2 NIC's in my Linux box,
    I want to be able to use BOTH routes. It matters not which one is
    chosen. I just know that since I have 2 DSL lines, I want to take
    advantage of the additional bandwidth and use both lines......

    Will what you posted, the route add statements, accomplish this?

    Thanks,

    Arthur


    Ben Measures wrote in message news:...
    > Arthur wrote:
    > > Hi all,
    > >
    > > I'm a total idiot when it comes to stuff like this, so maybe someone
    > > cal make it clear for me.
    > >
    > > I am running Mandrake 9.2 with 2 NIC's in the box. Here is my output
    > > of 'ifconfig':
    > >
    > > eth0 inet addr:192.168.1.110 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
    > >
    > > eth1 inet addr:192.168.0.110 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
    > >
    > > Now, I issue any of the following ROUTE ADD commands with no errors:
    > >
    > > 1) route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth0
    > > 2) route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth1
    > > 3) route add default gw 192.168.1.1 eth1

    >
    > There should only be one default (gateway) route. If your computer
    > wanted to send a packet to eg. 64.38.34.49 then which (default) route
    > should it use?
    >
    > Without more information about what you want to do, I'm thinking you're
    > wanting something like these:
    >
    > route add -net 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.1.1 eth0
    > so that all packets to the network 192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0 is sent
    > from eth0, through the gateway 192.168.1.1
    >
    > route add -net 192.168.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.0.1 eth1
    > so that all packets to the network 192.168.0.0/255.255.255.0 is sent
    > from eth1, through the gateway 192.168.0.1
    >
    > route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth1
    > so that the default is to send the packets (ie. all packets to
    > destinations other than the above rules) from eth1, through the gateway
    > 192.168.0.1.
    >
    > I recommend you work out what you want to do and have a thorough read of
    > 'man route'.
    >
    > --
    > Ben M.
    >
    > ----------------
    > What are Software Patents for?
    > To protect the small enterprise from bigger companies.
    >
    > What do Software Patents do?
    > In its current form, they protect only companies with
    > big legal departments as they:
    > a.) Patent everything no matter how general
    > b.) Sue everybody. Even if the patent can be argued
    > invalid, small companies can ill-afford the
    > typical $500k cost of a law-suit (not to mention
    > years of harassment).
    >
    > Don't let them take away your right to program
    > whatever you like. Make a stand on Software Patents
    > before its too late.
    >
    > Read about the ongoing battle at http://swpat.ffii.org/
    > ----------------


  6. Re: SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable?

    Arthur wrote:
    > Hi Ben,
    >
    > Thanks for replying. Actually, since I have 2 NIC's in my Linux box,
    > I want to be able to use BOTH routes. It matters not which one is
    > chosen. I just know that since I have 2 DSL lines, I want to take
    > advantage of the additional bandwidth and use both lines......
    >
    > Will what you posted, the route add statements, accomplish this?


    Have a look at the Advanced Routing and Traffic Control HOWTO. It deals
    with load-balancing multiple links.

    --
    Cameron Kerr
    cameron.kerr@paradise.net.nz : http://nzgeeks.org/cameron/
    Empowered by Perl!

  7. Re: SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable?

    Hi Ben,

    Thanks for replying to my post my routing table and such. I took your
    advice, and my routing tble now looks like this:

    Kernel IP routing table
    Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref
    Use Iface
    192.168.1.0 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0
    0 eth0
    192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0
    0 eth0
    192.168.0.0 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0
    0 eth1
    192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0
    0 eth1
    127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0
    0 lo
    0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0
    0 eth0
    0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 U 0 0
    0 eth0


    I have a couple of questions and I was hoping you could help.........

    If I have 2 DSL lines, and 2 IP's, then shouldn't data be piped over
    both of them? What decides which DSL line the data goes out over?

    Also, here is something interesting: I can telnet and SSH into one of
    the routes, but not the other......why is that? Shouldn't both be
    open?

    Thanks for all your help........I know it's a alot to ask, but I am
    lost and really in need of help....

    Thanks,

    Arthur


    Ben Measures wrote in message news:...
    > Arthur wrote:
    > > Hi all,
    > >
    > > I'm a total idiot when it comes to stuff like this, so maybe someone
    > > cal make it clear for me.
    > >
    > > I am running Mandrake 9.2 with 2 NIC's in the box. Here is my output
    > > of 'ifconfig':
    > >
    > > eth0 inet addr:192.168.1.110 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
    > >
    > > eth1 inet addr:192.168.0.110 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
    > >
    > > Now, I issue any of the following ROUTE ADD commands with no errors:
    > >
    > > 1) route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth0
    > > 2) route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth1
    > > 3) route add default gw 192.168.1.1 eth1

    >
    > There should only be one default (gateway) route. If your computer
    > wanted to send a packet to eg. 64.38.34.49 then which (default) route
    > should it use?
    >
    > Without more information about what you want to do, I'm thinking you're
    > wanting something like these:
    >
    > route add -net 192.168.1.0 netmask 255.255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.1.1 eth0
    > so that all packets to the network 192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0 is sent
    > from eth0, through the gateway 192.168.1.1
    >
    > route add -net 192.168.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.0.1 eth1
    > so that all packets to the network 192.168.0.0/255.255.255.0 is sent
    > from eth1, through the gateway 192.168.0.1
    >
    > route add default gw 192.168.0.1 eth1
    > so that the default is to send the packets (ie. all packets to
    > destinations other than the above rules) from eth1, through the gateway
    > 192.168.0.1.
    >
    > I recommend you work out what you want to do and have a thorough read of
    > 'man route'.
    >
    > --
    > Ben M.
    >
    > ----------------
    > What are Software Patents for?
    > To protect the small enterprise from bigger companies.
    >
    > What do Software Patents do?
    > In its current form, they protect only companies with
    > big legal departments as they:
    > a.) Patent everything no matter how general
    > b.) Sue everybody. Even if the patent can be argued
    > invalid, small companies can ill-afford the
    > typical $500k cost of a law-suit (not to mention
    > years of harassment).
    >
    > Don't let them take away your right to program
    > whatever you like. Make a stand on Software Patents
    > before its too late.
    >
    > Read about the ongoing battle at http://swpat.ffii.org/
    > ----------------


  8. Re: SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable?

    Hi Cameron,

    One other thing I am looking for is a way to tell IF both lines are
    being used. I mean, just because I can ping both routers does not
    mean that Linux is piping through both lines.......so I am looking for
    a way just to make sure that both lines are being used by the OS to
    send data.....

    Thanks,

    Arthur

    Cameron Kerr wrote in message news:<40204b7f@news.maxnet.co.nz>...
    > Arthur wrote:
    > > Hi Ben,
    > >
    > > Thanks for replying. Actually, since I have 2 NIC's in my Linux box,
    > > I want to be able to use BOTH routes. It matters not which one is
    > > chosen. I just know that since I have 2 DSL lines, I want to take
    > > advantage of the additional bandwidth and use both lines......
    > >
    > > Will what you posted, the route add statements, accomplish this?

    >
    > Have a look at the Advanced Routing and Traffic Control HOWTO. It deals
    > with load-balancing multiple links.


  9. Re: SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable?

    Cameron Kerr wrote:
    > Arthur wrote:
    >
    >>Hi Ben,
    >>
    >>Thanks for replying. Actually, since I have 2 NIC's in my Linux box,
    >>I want to be able to use BOTH routes. It matters not which one is
    >>chosen. I just know that since I have 2 DSL lines, I want to take
    >>advantage of the additional bandwidth and use both lines......
    >>
    >>Will what you posted, the route add statements, accomplish this?

    >
    >
    > Have a look at the Advanced Routing and Traffic Control HOWTO. It deals
    > with load-balancing multiple links.
    >


    Yes, this seems to be what you be wanting to do (load-balancing).

    Have look at the following link for a howto, many more links from google.
    http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.p...O.html?rev=1.2

    Be warned that this is can be a complex thing to setup (efficiently).

    --
    Ben M.

    ----------------
    What are Software Patents for?
    To protect the small enterprise from bigger companies.

    What do Software Patents do?
    In its current form, they protect only companies with
    big legal departments as they:
    a.) Patent everything no matter how general
    b.) Sue everybody. Even if the patent can be argued
    invalid, small companies can ill-afford the
    typical $500k cost of a law-suit (not to mention
    years of harassment).

    Don't let them take away your right to program
    whatever you like. Make a stand on Software Patents
    before its too late.

    Read about the ongoing battle at http://swpat.ffii.org/
    ----------------


  10. Re: SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable?

    Arthur wrote:
    > Hi Ben,
    >
    > Thanks for replying to my post my routing table and such. I took your
    > advice, and my routing tble now looks like this:
    >
    > Kernel IP routing table
    > Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
    > 192.168.1.0 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
    > 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
    > 192.168.0.0 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1
    > 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
    > 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
    > 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
    > 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0


    This isn't quite right.
    > 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
    > 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
    > 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0

    are extraneous (probably original entries by DHCP). These shouldn't make
    any difference but should be removed anyways for neatness.

    Make sure 192.168.0.1 and 192.168.1.1 really are your gateway addresses.
    I just put down the most common setup but it might be different for your
    networks (you might not even have gateways from the looks of things).

    > I have a couple of questions and I was hoping you could help.........
    >
    > If I have 2 DSL lines, and 2 IP's, then shouldn't data be piped over
    > both of them? What decides which DSL line the data goes out over?


    Just adding routes won't do what you want to do there. You want to do
    "load-balancing" - see my other post.

    > Also, here is something interesting: I can telnet and SSH into one of
    > the routes, but not the other......why is that? Shouldn't both be
    > open?


    If you are trying from the internet, then it is probably (almost
    definitely in the case of SSH) because network traffic is going out on a
    different route to the return. (Packets always leave your computer
    through eth0, the 192.168.1.x network.)

    > Thanks for all your help........I know it's a alot to ask, but I am
    > lost and really in need of help....


    Only glad to help, you seem to be genuinely and thoroughly searching for
    a solution here. Make sure you read my other post in this thread.

    --
    Ben M.

    ----------------
    What are Software Patents for?
    To protect the small enterprise from bigger companies.

    What do Software Patents do?
    In its current form, they protect only companies with
    big legal departments as they:
    a.) Patent everything no matter how general
    b.) Sue everybody. Even if the patent can be argued
    invalid, small companies can ill-afford the
    typical $500k cost of a law-suit (not to mention
    years of harassment).

    Don't let them take away your right to program
    whatever you like. Make a stand on Software Patents
    before its too late.

    Read about the ongoing battle at http://swpat.ffii.org/
    ----------------


  11. Re: SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable?

    Hey Ben,

    You've been quite helpful, but one of your comments mystifys me.

    > If you are trying from the internet, then it is probably (almost
    > definitely in the case of SSH) because network traffic is going out on a
    > different route to the return. (Packets always leave your computer
    > through eth0, the 192.168.1.x network.)


    If packets are leaving on the 1.x network, then would that mean that
    I'm not using both DSL lines? I would think that I should be able to
    connect to either. And, once I establish a connection on one or the
    other, that is where my traffic for my connection will be.......

    SSH is just a process running. I do not think that if only listens on
    one network......

    Thanks,

    Arthur





    Ben Measures wrote in message news:<6LbUb.167$%i5.67@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk>...
    > Arthur wrote:
    > > Hi Ben,
    > >
    > > Thanks for replying to my post my routing table and such. I took your
    > > advice, and my routing tble now looks like this:
    > >
    > > Kernel IP routing table
    > > Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
    > > 192.168.1.0 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
    > > 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
    > > 192.168.0.0 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1
    > > 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
    > > 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
    > > 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
    > > 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0

    >
    > This isn't quite right.
    > > 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
    > > 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
    > > 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0

    > are extraneous (probably original entries by DHCP). These shouldn't make
    > any difference but should be removed anyways for neatness.
    >
    > Make sure 192.168.0.1 and 192.168.1.1 really are your gateway addresses.
    > I just put down the most common setup but it might be different for your
    > networks (you might not even have gateways from the looks of things).
    >
    > > I have a couple of questions and I was hoping you could help.........
    > >
    > > If I have 2 DSL lines, and 2 IP's, then shouldn't data be piped over
    > > both of them? What decides which DSL line the data goes out over?

    >
    > Just adding routes won't do what you want to do there. You want to do
    > "load-balancing" - see my other post.
    >
    > > Also, here is something interesting: I can telnet and SSH into one of
    > > the routes, but not the other......why is that? Shouldn't both be
    > > open?

    >
    > If you are trying from the internet, then it is probably (almost
    > definitely in the case of SSH) because network traffic is going out on a
    > different route to the return. (Packets always leave your computer
    > through eth0, the 192.168.1.x network.)
    >
    > > Thanks for all your help........I know it's a alot to ask, but I am
    > > lost and really in need of help....

    >
    > Only glad to help, you seem to be genuinely and thoroughly searching for
    > a solution here. Make sure you read my other post in this thread.
    >
    > --
    > Ben M.
    >
    > ----------------
    > What are Software Patents for?
    > To protect the small enterprise from bigger companies.
    >
    > What do Software Patents do?
    > In its current form, they protect only companies with
    > big legal departments as they:
    > a.) Patent everything no matter how general
    > b.) Sue everybody. Even if the patent can be argued
    > invalid, small companies can ill-afford the
    > typical $500k cost of a law-suit (not to mention
    > years of harassment).
    >
    > Don't let them take away your right to program
    > whatever you like. Make a stand on Software Patents
    > before its too late.
    >
    > Read about the ongoing battle at http://swpat.ffii.org/
    > ----------------


  12. Re: SIOCADDRT: Network is Unreachable?

    Arthur wrote:
    > Hey Ben,
    >
    > You've been quite helpful, but one of your comments mystifys me.
    >
    >
    >>If you are trying from the internet, then it is probably (almost
    >>definitely in the case of SSH) because network traffic is going out on a
    >>different route to the return. (Packets always leave your computer
    >>through eth0, the 192.168.1.x network.)

    >
    >
    > If packets are leaving on the 1.x network, then would that mean that
    > I'm not using both DSL lines? I would think that I should be able to
    > connect to either. And, once I establish a connection on one or the
    > other, that is where my traffic for my connection will be.......


    Not necessarily...

    > SSH is just a process running. I do not think that if only listens on
    > one network......


    Its not. It's listening on *both* networks but is transmitting with just
    the *one* (the default route). Here's what I reckon is happening:

    Call 192.168.0.x 192.168.1.x network A and network B respectively. Call
    the DSLs connected to network A and network B, DSL1 and DSL2 resp.

    I said that ssh probably requires (for security reasons) the routes for
    incomimg traffic and outgoing traffic to be the same. I also said that
    all packets leave your computer from network B.

    So suppose you ssh via DSL2 on network B. The client computer (on the
    internet) sends packets via DSL2 through network B to the server. The
    server then sends its response out through eth0 (default route), through
    network A, out DSL2 to the client on the internet.

    Now suppose you ssh via DSL1 on network A. The client computer (on the
    internet) sends packets via DSL1 through network A to the server. The
    server then sends its response out through eth0 (default route), through
    network A, out DSL2 to the client on the internet. The client spots that
    the connection was sent to DSL1 but was recieved from DSL2 and so
    doesn't trust it, resulting in a 'broken' connection.

    Of course, I might be totally wrong here. If anybody knows better,
    please put me straight.

    --
    Ben M.

    ----------------
    What are Software Patents for?
    To protect the small enterprise from bigger companies.

    What do Software Patents do?
    In its current form, they protect only companies with
    big legal departments as they:
    a.) Patent everything no matter how general
    b.) Sue everybody. Even if the patent can be argued
    invalid, small companies can ill-afford the
    typical $500k cost of a law-suit (not to mention
    years of harassment).

    Don't let them take away your right to program
    whatever you like. Make a stand on Software Patents
    before its too late.

    Read about the ongoing battle at http://swpat.ffii.org/
    ----------------


+ Reply to Thread