Re: [44net] Ubiquiti XRouter X Gateway

Yes, you are right. The instructions in "setting up a gateway on Ubiquiti EdgeRouter" refer only to a simple tunnel installation and have nothing to do with the second one (and are not my creation). The ones described in "Installing ampr-ripd on a Ubiquiti EdgeRouter or EdgeRouter X" are let's say kind of complete, not related to the first ones, and could be conflicting. These describe a complete gateway set-up to my best knowledge, as tested by myself on my ER3 and ER-X, so this is the one I am referring. Marius, YO2LOJ On 31.01.2021 04:56, Lee D Bengston via 44Net wrote: > On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 1:05 PM Andrew Pepper via 44Net < > 44net(a)mailman.ampr.org&gt; wrote: > >> I'm having a similar issue as Lee. >> >> I'm wondering if all the steps are in the two wiki articles? >> >> I've tried both using a single erX( with a public IP on WAN) and >> hanging >> a 2nd erX off one of my NAT erX and I get the same issue. >> >> When I do a traceroute I'm going through UCSD, my IP shows as my 44 >> subnet (using IPchicken etc), I can ping but the RIP routes do not seem >> to populate the tables. >> >> Either I'm misreading the instructions (which is probably and highly >> possible) or I'm missing something. >> >> I did notice in >> <https://wiki.ampr.org/wiki/Setting_up_a_gateway_on_Ubiquiti_EdgeRouter> >> >> that the WAN_IN & WAN_LOCAL rulesets seem off. >> > I skipped the instructions available via that link - only applied the > instructions at this one: > https://wiki.ampr.org/wiki/Installing_ampr-ripd_on_a_Ubiquiti_EdgeRouter_or… > > > I thought about doing both, but I wasn't sure if two tunnel > interfaces were > really needed.  Perhaps the first one is just for sending default > traffic > to UCSD that is not covered by the tunnel routes? > > I'm not sure if it was needed, but in addition to adding a rule to allow > UDP 520 to the TUNNEL_LOCAL ruleset I added an equivalent rule to the > WAN_LOCAL ruleset.  Doing a packet capture I could see the RIP packets > coming in on the WAN port (eth0), so I thought perhaps they needed to be > sent locally from there for the ampr-ripd instance to receive them. > > -----<snip>---- > > 73, > Lee K5DAT > _________________________________________ > 44Net mailing list > 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org > https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net