News: This forum is now permanently frozen.
Pages: [1]
Topic: Problem with static routes  (Read 2285 times)
« on: April 25, 2007, 01:36:46 »
dameron *
Posts: 2

I have a pretty straightforward setup:

WAN1 -- m0n0wall --- LAN1(192.168.1.0/24) --- Sonicwall --- WAN2
                                                                                           |
                                                                                           |
                                                                          LAN2 (10.0.1.0/24)

I can get to WAN1 or WAN2 on either the m0n0wall or Sonicwall by swapping the gateway on the client machine.   When the LAN machine's  gateway points to the Sonicwall I can see machines on LAN2 fine.

When I change my gateway to use the m0n0wall  and add a static route such that:

Interface     Network             Gateway          
LAN1              LAN2             Sonicwall IP        
(192)              (10.0.1.0/24)      (192.168.1.3)

I get

PING 10.0.1.20 (10.0.1.20) 56(84) bytes of data.
From 192.168.1.2   icmp_seq=1 Redirect Host(New nexthop: 192.168.1.3)
64 bytes from 10.0.1.20: icmp_seq=3 ttl=128 time=0.763 ms


I can telnet to services on LAN2 but they become unresponsive as soon as the banner loads in telnet.

If I enter a static route in the client machine 

route add -net 10.0.1.0 gw 192.168.1.3  netmask 255.255.255.0

The client connects fine.

I'm at a loss as to why this doesn't work.  We have another Sonicwall that works very similarly to how I'm trying to get the m0n0wall to behave.   Any help would be great.

« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2007, 03:16:51 »
cmb *****
Posts: 851

If you check "Bypass firewall rules for traffic on the same interface" on the Advanced page, does that change anything?

Other than that...a static route is a static route. m0n0wall even sends ICMP redirects, as you're seeing, so the route is functioning. After your system gets the ICMP redirect, it's equivalent to adding a static route locally on the system so it working with a local static route and not without makes no sense.
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2007, 17:41:32 »
dameron *
Posts: 2

As it turns out that fixed it straight away, which I find very odd since I tried troubleshooting it by opening up that interface completely in the firewall rules.

Thanks for your help.
 
Pages: [1]
 
 
Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines