Am using Cent OS 6.2 (64bit), I have 4 NIC interface, in that am trying to connect two NIC with different subnet,
em1 with 10.30.2.x series
em4 with 10.30.4.x series
Also I added route with /sbin/route add -net 10.30.4.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 dev em4
When I make the network device up "ifup em4" am not able to ping both the interfaces.
There is no IPtables running and selinux also disabled.
The same setup is working in one more DELL server, in that server reverse IP and IP forwarding is not enabled, even then its working.
Reverse IP & IP Forwarding
cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/em2/rp_filter
1
cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
0
Any comments would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
If you are sure that ip addresses are actually setted on the interfaces, everything should work out, i would suggest to check network equipment on the way.
easiest way to test this is to use tcpdump -i any icmp and see if you actually receive the packets, this will also show you if your pong is going on the wrong interface.
hope that helps
Related
I have a PC with Ubuntu server 18.04 installed on it and I'm trying to use this PC as a server. There are 2 interfaces involved here:
To provide It's internet, I am using an android smartphone that has access to internet via it's Data and it will be sharing internet with my PC (server) via USB Tethering. This will create an interface called 'enp0s29f7u8'. This interface will get an IP automatically (DHCP?), mostly '192.168.42.249'.
There is another interface called 'enp2s0' which is a Huawei internet modem and it's connected to my PC with a LAN cable. This 'enp2s0' will serve as an Access-Point so I can SSH to my PC While I'm close. I installed 'ifupdown' on server so I can assign an Static IP to my Access-Point, namely '192.168.1.10'.
$ cat /etc/network/interfaces
auto enp2s0
iface enp2s0 inet static
address 192.168.1.10
netmask 255.255.255.0
network 192.268.0.0
gateway 192.168.1.1
dns-nameservers 192.168.1.1
Here is the problem: I cannot access internet with this setups. It's like Ubuntu is trying to connect to Internet via 'enp2s0', which is only an AP with no access to internet.
So i tried
sudo ifconfig enp2s0 down
and there it is, i have internet. Also, when I do
sudo ifconfig enp2s0 up
after that, i still have access to internet.
How can I config my PC so that it will always use 'enp0s29f7u8' to access internet and use 'enp2s0' only as an AP?
p.s. 1: I really don't understand network stuff. I tried changing default gateway (I don't know why) but it didn't helped(at least the way i did).
p.s. 2: I'm not a native English speaker. Hope that I could talk my mind.
To modify the routing table you have to use the command route.
If you run the command as super user it should show how the traffic is routed from your host. You have to change the default to enp0s29f7u8. In order to change it you can simply remove the default
# route del default
and add again
# route add default dev enp0s29f7u8
You can route only some address to the other interface. Have a look at the man for more option of the route command
Usually I prefer finding a solution on my own, but unfortunately that didn't work out too well this time so I'm asking here.
I'm trying to deal with a server (rather a computer with no screen and debian minimal on it) which is on the usual home network. Problem is the ISP is running out of ipv4 addresses and therefore
decided to use ipv6 instead and dual-stack lite to access the ipv4 side of the internet. This means the computer is not accessible over the ipv4 address from the outside
but is able to connect to a ipv4 computer.
I do have a vserver (debian as well) which still uses only ipv4, so my plan was to use it as some kind of relay or porxy. Problem there is, I am not able to use iptables to configure NAT
since the server provider has removed that module from the kernel.
My first attempt was to use an SSH tunnel like this:
ssh -f user#vserver -R 2222:localhost:22 -N
This allows me to access the CLI over SSH which now listens on port 2222.
Next step was to open a second SSH tunnel and tunnel UDP traffic through that using socat:
homeserver:~# socat tcp4-listen:${tcpport of second tunnel},reuseaddr,fork udp:localhost:${udpport to forward traffic from}
vserver:~# socat -T15 udp4-recvfrom:${udpport to forward traffic to},reuseaddr,fork tcp:localhost:${tcpport of second tunnel}
This does work, however once the client application is trying to connect to the UDP port, the server application is trying to continue the communication on a different new port from the dynamic
port range (Ephemeral Port Range I think). That one random port of course is not being forwarded since socat is not listening to.
The second attempt also involved an SSH tunnel, only a dynamic one this time (basically a socks proxy).
I was trying to setup a virtual network device to route all the traffic through the socks proxy:
(As described in man pages from badvpn-tun2socks)
homeserver:~# openvpn --mktun --dev tun0 --user <someuser> #create tun0 device
homeserver:~# ifconfig tun0 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 #configure it
homeserver:~# route add <IP_vserver> gw <IP_of_original_gateway> metric #Route all traffic through tun0
homeserver:~# route add default gw 10.0.0.2 metric 6 #exept the ones to the vserver
homeserver:~# badvpn-tun2socks --tundev tun0 --netif-ipaddr 10.0.0.2 --netif-netmask 255.255.255.0 --socks-server-addr 127.0.0.1:1080 \
--udpgw-remote-server-addr 127.0.0.1:7300
This needs to SSH socks-proxies since upd needs to be handled seperately.
On the vserver side of things these need to be handled as well:
vserver:~# badvpn-udpgw --listen-addr 127.0.0.1:7300
The connection between both is successful but this time the homeserver is not accessible at all. (seems to me like the vserver has no clue what to do with the packets)
I hope there is a simple fix to either of my attempts. But as it stands now,
I think my whole approach is fundamentally flawed and I'm starting to run out of ideas.
Any help would be appreciated, Thanks in advance!
I have a dual port ethernet NIC and let's say I have connected 2 ports in a loop and assigned the following IPs to the 2 ethernet interfaces:
eth2 -> 192.168.2.1
eth3 -> 192.168.3.1
I want to send traffic from 1 port to another over the physical network, e.g. ping 192.168.3.1 from 192.168.2.1. However, the TCP/IP stack in the Linux kernel recognizes that these two addresses are local and instead sends the traffic to the loopback adapter, so the traffic never hits the physical network.
The closest I have to a solution is Anastasov's send-to-self patch, which unfortunately, has been discontinued since kernel 3.6 so it won't work on Ubuntu 13.10 (kernel 3.11) for me. I've tried finding rewriting the patch for 3.11, but I can't seem to locate these in the Ubuntu distro:
include/linux/inetdevice.h
net/ipv4/devinet.c
net/ipv4/fib_frontend.c
net/ipv4/route.c
Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.txt
Is there a way I can get the send-to-self patch to work, or an alternative?
You can use network namespaces for this purpose.
As ip-netns's manpage says:
A network namespace is logically another copy of the network stack,
with its own routes, firewall rules, and network devices.
Following is just a copy of this answer:
Create a network namespace and move one of interfaces into it:
ip netns add test
ip link set eth1 netns test
Start a shell in the new namespace:
ip netns exec test bash
Then proceed as if you had two machines. When finished exit the shell and delete the namespace:
ip netns del test
you can try configuring route table, by running "ip" command:
ip route add to unicast 192.168.3.1 dev eth2
ip route add to unicast 192.168.2.1 dev eth3
new route would be added into route table, and it should be able to take effect before egress routing lookup hit the host-local route between "192.168.3.1" and "192.168.2.1", therefore, the traffic should be sent through physical interface "eth2" and "eth3", instead of loopback "lo"
Never tried myself, but should work.
I'm trying to test a ethernet bridging device. I have multiple ethernet ports on a linux box. I would like to send packets out one interface, say eth0 with IP 192.168.1.1, to another interface, say eth1 with IP 192.168.1.2, on the same subnet.
I realize that normally you don't configure two interfaces on the same subnet, and if you do the kernel routes directly to each interface, rather than over the wire. How can I override this behavior, so that traffic to 192.168.1.2 goes out the 192.168.1.1 interface, and visa-versa?
Thanks in advance!
This is a guess, but I hope it is in the right direction.
Make more-specific routing table entries, along the lines of:
route add -host 192.168.1.2 dev eth0
route add -host 192.168.1.1 dev eth1
You may also need to fiddle with the accept_local configuration for both interfaces -- or the all setting. (Turning this on may make your machine more susceptible to IP source spoofing attacks; be sure you have good ingress firewall rules elsewhere to prevent trouble.) (See sysctl -a | grep accept_local for what I'm talking about.)
I think you need something like Mac-Vlan in your Linux. This cannot be done with NAT only. Read this: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7268.
I have two machines each with two valid network interfaces, an Ethernet interface eth0 and a tun/tap interface gr0. The goal is to start a TCP connection on machine A using interface gr0 but then have the responses (ACKs, etc) from machine B come back over the Ethernet interface, eth0. So, machine A sends out a SYN on gr0 and machine B receives the SYN on its own gr0 but then sends its SYN/ACK back through eth0. The tun/tap device is a GNU Radio wireless link and we just want the responses to come through the Ethernet.
What's the easiest way to accomplish this? I need to research more on TCP/IP, but I was initially thinking that source-spoofing outgoing packets would tell the receiver to respond to the spoofed address (which should get routed to eth0). This would involve routing the IPs from the tun/tap interfaces through gr0 and leave the other traffic to eth0.
We are using Linux and a Python solution would be preferable.
Thanks for looking!
You could add an additional address to the lo interface on each system and use these new addresses as the TCP connection endpoints. You can then use static routes to direct which path each machine takes to get to the other machine's lo address.
For example:
Machine A:
ip addr add 1.1.1.1/32 dev lo
ip route add 2.2.2.2/32 dev eth0 via <eth0 default gateway>
Machine B:
ip addr add 2.2.2.2/32 dev lo
ip route add 1.1.1.1/32 dev gr0
Then bind to 1.1.1.1 on machine A and connect to 2.2.2.2.
You may be interested in enabling logging of martian packets net.ipv4.conf.all.log_martians, and disable reverse path filtering net.ipv4.conf.<interface>.rp_filter on the affected interfaces.
This sysctl vars are accesible via the sysctl utility and/or the /proc filesystem.