Re: PPP and virtual lo: routing problem

[Thomas Fleury (thomas.fleury@elsys-design.com)]

Hi,

I think you should define a "dummy" interface for your client:
    ifconfig dummy 192.168.1.4

Actually, I noticed that the behaviour of the dummy interface was not
exactly the same as an alias on the loopback interface.

The dummy interface is described in the Network Administrator's Guide
http://www.tldp.org/guides.html

Thomas.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Denis Zaitsev" <zzz@xxxxxxx>
To: "Nick Patavalis" <npat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: PPP and virtual lo: routing problem


> On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 12:18:41PM +0300, Nick Patavalis wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 12:25:20AM +0600, Denis Zaitsev wrote:
> > > On Sun, Sep 14, 2003 at 11:19:02AM +0600, Denis Zaitsev wrote:
> > > > > I'm setting up a PPP link between two Linuxes.  Let them be called
as
> > > > > server (who receives a call) and client (who calls out).  After
the
> > > > > connection has been established, the machines have got the
following
> > > > > interfaces:
> > > > >
> > > > > Server (2.4.22):
> > > > >         lo      127.0.0.1       /8
> > > > >         eth0    192.168.1.1     /24
> > > > >         ppp1    192.168.1.253   /32
> > > > >
> > > > > Client (2.4.20):
> > > > >         lo      127.0.0.1       /8
> > > > >         lo:1    192.168.1.4     /24
> > > > >         ppp0    192.168.1.254   /32
> > > > >
> > > > > And in this configuration no one ping from the server has a reply.
> > >
> > > > What exactly do you ping? Do you ping 192.168.1.254, or 192.168.1.4?
> > > > In the second case, it is perfectly normal for it not to work (at
> > > > least not as you expect).
> > >
> > > I ping the PPP peer, of course...  And the result is enigmatic,
> > > though...
> > >
> >
> > If in the setup above you do (from the server):
> >
> >   ping 192.168.1.254
> >
> > it should work.
>
> Yes, it obviously _should_ work.  But what (and why) I'm writing about
> - it _doesn't_.  BTW, when eth0=192.168.1.4 is used instead of lo:1 on
> the client side, all work as it should, so I suspect that it's some
> lo-specific issue.
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html