| To: | <cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de> |
| Subject: | Re: Win2k and CIPE |
| From: | "Hans Steegers" <hsx,AT,dds,DOT,nl> |
| Date: | Wed, 3 Sep 2003 02:09:29 +0200 |
| Reply-to: | "Hans Steegers" <steegers,AT,steegers,DOT,nl> |
>No this is on the client(s) not the server. If you lie about the size of >the subnet on the client end it should send all packets to the server >which then worries about which subnet they should be going to. Jake, If you specify a route to a subnet, you are already on. What would you expect to happen? The packet is already on the destination subnet! I am not surprised you can't get this to work. Hans Steegers -----Original Message----- From: Jake Bullet <jbullet,AT,cats,DOT,meow,DOT,at> To: Hans Steegers <steegers,AT,steegers,DOT,nl> Cc: cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de <cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de> Date: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 12:32 AM Subject: Re: Win2k and CIPE >On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Hans Steegers wrote: > >> Jake, >> >> >I've tried adding routes for 172.16.0.0/255.255.0.0 and the win2k client >> >seems to fail to route packets for 172.16.0.0 down it. >> >> Shouldn't that be 172.16.0.0/255.255._255_.0 for cibcb0 !? >> >> A mask of 255.255.0.0 includes both 172.16.0.2 AND 172.16.1.2, so it is >> difficult to know to which interface to send the packets.. >> >> Hans Steegers >> > >No this is on the client(s) not the server. If you lie about the size of >the subnet on the client end it should send all packets to the server >which then worries about which subnet they should be going to. > >Stephen > > >-- >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>