[2292] in linux-net channel archive
Re: IGRP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ATPlack@scj.com)
Fri Mar 29 17:47:28 1996
From: ATPlack@scj.com
Date: 29 Mar 96 13:38:44 -0600
To: ATPlack@scj.com, zap@kraken.port-aransas.k12.tx.us
Cc: csd@microplex.com, linux-net@vger.rutgers.edu, linux-ppp@vger.rutgers.edu
>> I have enabled packet forwarding on the kernel and recompiled. The RIP
>> packets look correct from the Linux box.
I did not state it correctly, yes, I do have IP forwarding and multicast in
the kernel enabled.
----------
From: zap@kraken.port-aransas.k12.tx.us
To: Plack, Anthony, T.
Cc: csd@microplex.com; linux-net@vger.rutgers.edu;
linux-ppp@vger.rutgers.edu
Subject: Re: IGRP
Date: Thursday, March 28, 1996 3:32PM
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Is your kernel configured for IP Forawarding/Multicasting?
<zap@kraken.port-aransas.k12.tx.us>
"Every Day, from here to there, funny things are everywhere."
-- The Late Dr. Seuss
On 26 Mar 1996 ATPlack@scj.com wrote:
>
> I have one NT box, one Novell server (set up as a IP router), one
> Workstation (WFW 3.11), and one Linux box.
>
> The Novell server, workstation and NT box have the default route as the
> Linux box. The Linux box has the default route through the PPP link.
>
> gated is not running.
>
> I am not able to Ping from the NT, Novell, or Workstation to the other
side
> of the Linux box.
>
> When I do an IPtrace from the workstation, I can see the RIP from the
Novell
> server and the Linux box (and some stupid NETBIOS broadcasts from the NT
> box).
>
> I have enabled packet forwarding on the kernel and recompiled. The RIP
> packets look correct from the Linux box.
>
> During a PING on the NT box, it returns a message that indicates the Linux
> box rejecting that route as unreachable.
>
> A ping from the Linux box across the link works okay. Only the Linux box
> can communicate across the link.
>
> According to the NET-2 How-To. I do not see any other piece that should
be
> needed.
>
> Why is the Linux box not routing the packets?
>
> Since I see the RIP packets, why would I need gated?
> ----------
> From: csd@microplex.com
> To: Plack, Anthony, T.
> Cc: linux-net@vger.rutgers.edu; linux-ppp@vger.rutgers.edu
> Subject: Re: IGRP
> Date: Tuesday, March 26, 1996 3:55AM
>
> X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME7]
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Precedence: bulk
>
> > I have a great connection to the network now through the PPP link.
> However,
> > that is only on my linux machine.
> >
> > I assume that gated will help get the route available to the other
> machines
> > on my local Ethernet segment. If not, someone let me know. I am going
to
>
> > try this this week.
> It shouldn't. Host computers should not get their routing info from
> routing protocol updates. Gated is there to make routers talk to
> themselves. You'll probably need to configure at least the default
> gateway on the other machines. The rest should sort itself out from there
>
> > My primary concern is that I might need to support IGRP. See the
network
> > guys here have disabled RIP on all networks at our sight in favor of
IGRP
> > from Cisco.
> >
> > Any ideas on support for this through Linux.
> >
> As far as I know, IGRP is proprietary and cisco has patents on some
> portions of it, so I don't think you'll get Linux boxes talking IGRP
> anytime soon.
> (Could someone confirm/deny this info that I have?)
>
> cheers,
>
> Christian.
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Christian Daudt (csd@microplex.com) Software Engineer
> Microplex Systems Ltd. URL: http://www.microplex.com/
> "You can tell how far we have to go, when FORTRAN is the language of
> supercomputers." -- Steven Feiner
>
>
>
>
