<< | Thread Index | >> ]    [ << | Date Index | >> ]

Subject: RE: CIPE 1.46 in LRP 298
From: John Hamill <jh,AT,lan1,DOT,com,DOT,au>
Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2001 04:15:15 +0200

G'day Norm,

Yes I have this working to some degree. I can make an image for you if you
are interested when I go into work on Monday which you can copy onto a hard
drive. You only need to change the syslinux.cfg file to make it boot from
the floppy.

john

-----Original Message-----
From: Norm Woodward [mailto:normw,AT,njwtech,DOT,com
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 5:09 PM
To: cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de
Subject: RE: CIPE 1.46 in LRP 298

I boot off a hard drive.  Do you have a 2.2.xx kernel that boots off the
hard drive, works with Cipe 1.4.6 and has a full set of masq and driver
modules?  If so I would love to have that combination.  I am not really in a
position to be able to compile the cipcb module and/or the kernel, and I
have been unable to find a working combination...  Your help is appreciated.

..
Norm

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de [mailto:owner-cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de Behalf 
Of
John Hamill
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 8:52 PM
To: cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de
Subject: RE: CIPE 1.46 in LRP 298

G'day Norm,

my suspicion (with my somewhat limited experience) is that this is kernel
related. I have a a couple of LRP boxes I have put together and I get the
same error message when I use the floppy only kernel. If I use the
floppy+ide kernel then it seems to work OK. I have a working system booting
of the IDE hard drive, all I basically did was copy those files off onto a
floppy and use the floppy linux file. As soon as I reboot with the floppy
and try to ping the CIPE ip address I get the changing peer address message.
After I copied down the linux kernel from the hard drive it works fine from
the floppy.

John

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Norm Woodward [mailto:normw,AT,njwtech,DOT,com
>Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2001 3:01 AM
>To: cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de
>Subject: RE: CIPE 1.46 in LRP 298
>
>
>It is 0.  Thanks.
>
>..
>Norm
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: SBNelson,AT,thermeon,DOT,com [mailto:SBNelson,AT,thermeon,DOT,com
>Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 9:28 AM
>To: normw,AT,njwtech,DOT,com; cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de
>Subject: RE: CIPE 1.46 in LRP 298
>
>
>I don't have an answer for you, but I am curious if
>/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_dynaddr is 1 or 0.
>
>> Further to this message I sent earlier - I have also
>discovered that there
>> is a weird message that shows up in /var/log/messages that says:
>>
>> Oct  3 08:58:58 router kernel: cipcb1: changing my address: 2.0.0.0
>>
>> and when I monitor packet traffic between the two carriers
>there is an
>> attempt
>> to send udp packets from 2.0.0.0:9990 to the other carrier.
>Of course
>> there
>> is no reply sent.  This must be the root of the problem, but
>I can't see
>> why
>> the daemon suddenly tries to change its address when it sends packets
>> between
>> the carriers.  Any ideas?
>>
>> ..
>> Norm
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de [mailto:owner-cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de 
>> Behalf Of
>> Norm Woodward
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 6:02 PM
>> To: cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de
>> Subject: CIPE 1.46 in LRP 298
>>
>>
>> I REALLY tried... honest.  I have been working this over and
>over for 2
>> whole days and I just can't make it work.  I downloaded
>ciped-1.lrp for
>> the 2.2.19 kernel from leaf.sourceforge.net and installed it
>in my 2.9.8
>> LRP.  The interface appears to come up correctly, but
>traffic does not go
>> through it (i.e. I can't ping through it).  Here is what
>ifconfig looks
>> like:
>>
>> cipcb0    Link encap:IPIP Tunnel  HWaddr
>>           inet addr:10.0.98.24  P-t-P:10.0.99.24
>Mask:255.255.255.255
>>           UP POINTOPOINT NOTRAILERS RUNNING NOARP  MTU:1442  Metric:1
>>           RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
>>           TX packets:38 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
>>           collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
>>
>> The other machine is configured the same except with numbers
>reversed.
>> Its interface acts exactly the same.  Notice there are TX packets at
>> the cipcb0 interface but no RX.
>>
>> My options looks like this:
>>
>> ptpaddr         10.0.99.24
>> ipaddr          10.0.98.24
>> me              24.7.141.99:9990
>> peer            24.7.141.186:9990
>> nokey
>> maxerr          -1
>>
>> This is what the debug info looks like:
>>
>> Starting ciped-cb on cipcb0 using /etc/cipe/options.cipcb0
>> CIPE daemon vers 1.4.6 (c) Olaf Titz 1996-2000
>> device=cipcb0
>> debug=yes
>> ipaddr=10.0.98.24
>> ptpaddr=10.0.99.24
>> mtu=0
>> metric=0
>> cttl=0
>> me=24.7.141.99:9990
>> peer=24.7.141.186:9990
>> key=(none)
>> nokey=yes
>> socks=
>> tokxc=0
>> tokey=0
>> ipup=(none)
>> ipdown=(none)
>> arg=(none)
>> maxerr=-1
>> tokxts=0
>> ping=0
>> toping=0
>> dynip=no
>> Using cipcb0 index 0
>>
>> I am running it with "nokey" option right now to
>> eliminate that as a possible problem.  Here is the route table:
>>
>> Kernel IP routing table
>> Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric
>Ref    Use
>> Iface
>> 10.0.99.24      0.0.0.0         255.255.255.255 UH    0
>0        0
>> cipcb0
>> 24.7.141.0      0.0.0.0         255.255.255.128 U     0
>0        0
>> eth0
>> 10.0.99.0       10.0.99.24      255.255.255.0   UG    0
>0        0
>> cipcb0
>> 10.0.98.0       0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     0
>0        0
>> eth1
>> 0.0.0.0         24.7.141.1      0.0.0.0         UG    0
>0        0
>> eth0
>>
>> And yet this is what happens when I ping the other end of the tunnel:
>>
>> router2# ping 10.0.99.24
>> PING 10.0.99.24 (10.0.99.24): 56 data bytes
>>
>> --- 10.0.99.24 ping statistics ---
>> 7 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss
>>
>> I have ipchains filters set to do no filtering of any kind between
>> these two boxes.  I even have rules accepting packets from the
>> internal network of the other router - no luck.
>>
>> I may have something wrong with my forwarding rules:
>>
>> router2# ipchains -L forward -n
>> Chain forward (policy ACCEPT):
>> target     prot opt     source                destination
>       ports
>> MASQ       all  ------  10.0.98.0/24          0.0.0.0/0
>       n/a
>>
>> I sure would appreciate any ideas or any help.  I was going
>to monitor
>> the mail list for a while to make sure I wasn't asking a
>completely stupid
>> question, but time is becoming a factor.  Thanks for your help.
>>
>> ..
>> Norm Woodward
>>
>>
>> --
>> Message sent by the cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de mailing list.
>> Unsubscribe: mail majordomo,AT,inka,DOT,de, "unsubscribe cipe-l" in body
>> Other commands available with "help" in body to the same address.
>> CIPE info and list archive:
>> <URL:http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/cipe.html>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Message sent by the cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de mailing list.
>> Unsubscribe: mail majordomo,AT,inka,DOT,de, "unsubscribe cipe-l" in body
>> Other commands available with "help" in body to the same address.
>> CIPE info and list archive:
>> <URL:http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/cipe.html>
>
>
>--
>Message sent by the cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de mailing list.
>Unsubscribe: mail majordomo,AT,inka,DOT,de, "unsubscribe cipe-l" in body
>Other commands available with "help" in body to the same address.
>CIPE info and list archive:
><URL:http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/cipe.html>
>

--
Message sent by the cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de mailing list.
Unsubscribe: mail majordomo,AT,inka,DOT,de, "unsubscribe cipe-l" in body
Other commands available with "help" in body to the same address.
CIPE info and list archive:
<URL:http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/cipe.html>

--
Message sent by the cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de mailing list.
Unsubscribe: mail majordomo,AT,inka,DOT,de, "unsubscribe cipe-l" in body
Other commands available with "help" in body to the same address.
CIPE info and list archive:
<URL:http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/cipe.html>





<< | Thread Index | >> ]    [ << | Date Index | >> ]