Re: Route tables
From: jack (not_at_all.org)
Date: 02/03/04
- Next message: Oliver O'Boyle: "Re: Intranet plus cable connection."
- Previous message: John Culleton: "Re: Intranet plus cable connection."
- In reply to: Scott Dortch: "Route tables"
- Next in thread: P Gentry: "Re: Route tables"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 20:13:42 +0100
Scott Dortch wrote:
> The IP address for this machine is 192.168.1.222
> After a route-n the table currently looks like:
>
> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use
> Iface
> 192.168.1.222 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0
> eth0
> 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0
> eth0
> 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
OK, first off all this routing table is a bit messed, but otherwise
valid. Firstly, You needn't have Your own IP in it, and secondly,
You needn't have Your loopback in it. Those entries are redundant
and hence senseless, but not harmful.
The thing is that Your default route (the last one) points to Your
"default gateway". Is that box with 192.168.1.1 up and running and
connected to Your network properly, _and_, is it configured to
allow forwarding (and NATting) traffic from Your client?
Try to check that step by step.
Cheers, Jack.
-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- My personal reading of the string "MicroSoft" expands to "NanoWeak"...
- Next message: Oliver O'Boyle: "Re: Intranet plus cable connection."
- Previous message: John Culleton: "Re: Intranet plus cable connection."
- In reply to: Scott Dortch: "Route tables"
- Next in thread: P Gentry: "Re: Route tables"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
