From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Jul 25 1: 1:28 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from 2711.dynacom.net (2711.dynacom.net [206.107.213.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 502DB37B9DA for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:01:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kstewart@urx.com) Received: from urx.com (dsl1-160.dynacom.net [206.159.132.160]) by 2711.dynacom.net (Build 101 8.9.3/NT-8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA01478; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:01:22 -0700 Message-ID: <397D4984.79881DDC@urx.com> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:02:12 -0700 From: Kent Stewart Reply-To: kstewart@urx.com Organization: Dynacom X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cjclark@alum.mit.edu Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ppp(8) NAT Problem References: <20000724235300.D258@pool0653.cvx20-bradley.dialup.e> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "Crist J. Clark" wrote: > > I am having a problem with userland ppp(8), and it started when I > started running with the builtin NAT. When the connection is lost by > time out or disconnect and restarted, the tun0 interface just piles on > a new address and it retains the old. For example, > > % ifconfig tun0 > tun0: flags=8051 mtu 1500 > inet 10.0.0.1 --> 10.0.0.2 netmask 0xffffffff > inet 209.179.252.143 --> 255.255.255.255 netmask 0xffffffff > inet 209.179.253.65 --> 255.255.255.255 netmask 0xffffffff > inet 209.179.251.124 --> 207.217.148.27 netmask 0xffffffff > Opened by PID 58 > > The 10-net numbers are the defaults I put in the ppp.conf. The second > and third pair are real ones that were in use, but the connection > timed out and was dropped. Notice the odd mangling of the other end of > the link to 255.255.2555.255. The last entry is the link currently > up. > > Is this expected behaviour? I'm starting to build up weird entries in > the routing table as well, No. You need to look at the examples of ppp.linkup and ppp.linkdown. You need all three. The linkup/down files clear the old interfaces so that you don't end up with the old information included with the new. I don't know what the current examples look like. When I did my ppp interface, you only included your setup in the linkup/down files. Mine were 2 or 3 lines long. Kent > > % netstat -rn > Routing tables > > Internet: > Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Netif Expire > default 207.217.148.27 UGSc 3 19522 tun0 > 10.0.0.2 10.0.0.1 UH 0 0 tun0 > 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 UH 2 7110 lo0 > 192.168.xxx link#4 UC 0 0 ep0 => > 192.168.xxx.1 0:e0:29:11:d3:a9 UHLW 3 22463 ep0 1180 > 207.217.148.27 209.179.251.124 UH 4 0 tun0 > 255.255.255.255 209.179.252.143 UHb 0 0 tun0 > > What's that last one? But the real numbers have been removed and the > default route has been overwritten correctly. > > Bug or feature? Or misconfiguration? Nothing surprising in ppp.conf > and I'm running with, > > ppp_enable="YES" > ppp_nat="YES" > ppp_profile="EarthLink" > gateway_enable="YES" > > -- > Crist J. Clark cjclark@alum.mit.edu > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA mailto:kbstew99@hotmail.com http://kstewart.urx.com/kstewart/index.html FreeBSD News http://daily.daemonnews.org/ Bomber dropping fire retardant in front of Hanford Wild fire. http://kstewart.urx.com/kstewart/bomber.jpg To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message