Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 15:20:56 -0600 (MDT) From: Jonathon Doran <doranj@Colorado.EDU> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ping Message-ID: <199906292120.PAA21762@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> In-Reply-To: <H000008201dcb10a@MHS> from "Clem.Dye@wdr.com" at Jun 29, 99 02:55:33 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The use of ".1" as a gateway is a convention that some sites use, and isn't required. Since the BSD box is the gateway for this network (it gates via the modem), moving it off .1 and then using .1 as a gateway address wouldn't work. There would be no machine on the network at .1, so traffic for that address would be discarded. > OK, I'm pretty new to this routing stuff, but I thought that the .1 > address was normally reserved for a gateway. If so, shouldn't the BSD > box have it's own IP address and a gateway address? With that in Turning to the original complaint... (ed: corrected the spacing on the diagram) > > Rami Soudah wrote: > > > ISP <-----modem--->BSD (earth) > > > | > > > Win (metro) > > > > > > WIN-Hostname = metro = 192.168.0.2 > > > BSD-Hostname = earth = 192.168.0.1 > > > I configured the BSD as Gateway for my Win box. This seems like a reasonable thing to do. A lot of us, including myself, do this. > > > I could ping 'earth' 'metro' and 'localhost' from the BSD box, and > > > and I did the same at Win box, I was able to ping 'earth' > 'localhost' > > > from the Win box without having any troubles, > > > but _not_ 'metro'. The problem appears to be name resolution related, see below. > > > c:\windows>ping metro > > > Pinging metro [4.0.0.3] with 32 bytes of data: The name "metro" is being resolved as 4.0.0.3, which is incorrect. This is l0.washdc3-cmb.bbnplanet.net, sound familiar? The address is unimportant in any case. > > > Reply from 192.168.0.1: Destination host unreachable. Either the FreeBSD machine isn't routing the traffic to bbnplanet, or (more likely) the address is dynamically assigned and isn't in use. > > > *) I was wondering from where 4.0.0.3 comes?? Good question. How did you configure name resolution on the Windows machine? Are you using WINS, DNS, an LMHOSTS file? > > > *) Why I keep getting 'Reply from 192.168.0.1'? i am not pinging > > > 192.168.0.1 it should be 192.168.0.2. The FreeBSD machine is reporting the error. It received an ICMP destination unreachable packet, and forwards this to the Windows machine. This seems OK. > > > What could be wrong? > > > my /etc/hosts (BSD) I don't see any evidence that the FreeBSD machine is configured wrong. Most likely cause is the Windows machine obtaining resolution info from a strange source. > > > c:\windows\hosts (Win) > > > 127.0.0.1 localhost > > > 192.168.0.1 earth earth.my.domain > > > 192.168.0.2 metro metro.my.domain This file may not be in use. Check your TCP/IP properties tab in the network control panel. > > > P.S. If I ping the IP's I dont have any troubles in both > machines. Further evidence to support a name resolution diagnosis. > > Microsoft TCP/IP > > seems to work better if you set "File and Printer Sharing" both to > "ON" Not an issue here. Lets work one problem at a time. > One thing more, i cant run mIRC at my Win-box mIRC requires a proxy such as socks5. ipfw or ipnat may do the job for you, I haven't experimented with these. I run proxies on the gateway instead. I haven't had success with DCC yet, one of these days I might get around to putting together a proxy for it. Until then, expect to be DCC-less on the interior network, unless someone comes up with a good solution (other than plug-boarding every single port). Jon Doran To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199906292120.PAA21762>