Prev: Cisco PIX 501 - How could I configure a VPN tunnel back to the office
Next: ospf and openvpn
From: Moe Trin on 18 Jun 2010 16:03
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
article <hve091$jha$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Tauno Voipio wrote:

>Moe Trin wrote:

>> Did you discuss this with your network administrator? Perhaps he
>> can come up with an explanation for the rather... incredible
>> (trying to be polite) routing setup. Some would call this absolute
>> stupidity, but that's still being polite. Let me repeat this:
>> TALK TO YOUR NETWORK ADMINISTRATOR.

>The network seems to belong to Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
>Information technology Division.

Yup - that's why I was telling the O/P to talk to the net-admin.

>I just wonder which kind of knowledge is used to run the network.

Probably not as much as was used to create it in the first place.
The network was allocated to Massachusetts in 1991 (about five years
after RFC0950 sub-networking), and _some_ thought was used to come
up with the /25 mask scheme. That may have been with help from BBN,
and the ``interesting'' features of logical overlays were likely
added at a much later date. I'd expect that network management has
heard about it from a lot of people, but things are to complicated
to change now. The IPv4 Link-Local addresses do suggest that the
skills are somewhat lacking.

>I'm happy that I'm not a resident of Mass.

Same here.

>Tauno Voipio, pretty old, as well (64 years)

Nah, you're just a young kid (Haven't even reached 70 yet!) ;-)

Old guy
From: Moe Trin on 18 Jun 2010 16:05
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
article <hvdlfq$2as8$1(a)saria.nerim.net>, Pascal Hambourg wrote:

>Tauno Voipio a �crit :

>> The logic in the Microsoft stack evades me ....

>Yup, this looks so wrong...

Please don't confuse the garbage that the microsoft tools display to
the users. This is ``technical data'' that microsoft is intentionally
displaying in a confusing manner to scare the user. There is enough
there to tell what's going on if you ignore the obvious bullshit. The
actual stack is an ``improvement'' of the BSD stack that microsoft
copied without giving any credit (in violation of the BSD copyright).

As for Classless/Classful, please remember that RFC1519 only occurred
two years before microsoft invented the Internet, and the concept was
very confusing to the microsoft inventors.

Old guy
From: Denis McMahon on 18 Jun 2010 18:50
On 17/06/10 13:35, Shawn wrote:
> Hi Denis,
>
> Revisiting this....
>
> "So what you could do is set the netmask to 255.255.128.0 and then
> route
> add default 146.243.124.1. "
>
> When I changed the netmask and restarted networking this had no
> effect.
>
> However upon rebooting with just the netmask changed in the interfaces
> file got this working. I did not need to add the route to the
> machine.

You may have achieved limited functionality, you may however discover
that there are side effects of this method further down the line, such
as being unable to communicate with other systems that the computer now
thinks are part of your local network but which are actually accessed
through the gateway router.

It would be much better, if you can do it, to keep the old netmask and
add the correct default route, eg:

1) Set the netmask back to 255.255.254.0
2) Tell it to reach 146.243.124.1 by sending packets on eth0
3) Tell it the default route is to 146.243.124.1

Try the following in /etc/network/interfaces (You might want to comment
out any other stuff that's in there):

#==============================================

auto lo
iface lo inet loopback
address 127.0.0.1
netmask 255.0.0.0

auto eth0
iface eth0 inet static
address 146.243.56.160
netmask 255.255.254.0
dns-nameservers 8.8.4.4 8.8.8.8
up route add -host 146.243.124.1 eth0
up route add default gw 146.243.124.1
down route del -host 146.243.124.1 eth0
down route del default gw 146.243.124.1

#==============================================

Note that this example uses google public dns, you may wish to use other
dns servers.

Reboot, tell us if it works, if it doesn't, you can go back to the
current even less ideal solution that you have.

Rgds

Denis McMahon
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Prev: Cisco PIX 501 - How could I configure a VPN tunnel back to the office
Next: ospf and openvpn