Your routes look correct.
Traffic will follow the most 'precise' given route.
For example, lets first use a made-up route to 44.2.12.75. Since your table does not show a 'specific' subnet, it will use your rule of "44.0.0.0 169.228.66.251 255.0.0.0"
But, if you use a route to 44.2.14.3, your tables show a more precise route to that address, so your traffic will use your route rule of "44.2.14.0 50.79.156.221 255.255.255.248"
The only thing I see in your route that may or may not be of concern, is the third line. Not sure what your interface "rose0" goes too, but I see a possible conflict with the route right above it.
You basically have two (2) routes listed for traffic to 44.0.0.0/8 Other than that, that looks good.
As everyone's setups are custom, I don't know what that interface "rose0" does for your system.
Bill
At 03:32 PM 8/24/2013, you wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Hi all,
My routing table after my AMPRnet GATEWAY has got all the routes via RIPv2 using rip44d, looks like this:
Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 0.0.0.0 192.168.15.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 44.0.0.0 169.228.66.251 255.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 tunl0 44.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 30 0 0 rose0 44.0.0.1 169.228.66.251 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 tunl0 44.2.1.32 76.14.161.185 255.255.255.248 UG 0 0 0 tunl0 44.2.10.0 71.130.72.52 255.255.255.248 UG 0 0 0 tunl0 44.2.11.1 71.130.72.52 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 tunl0 44.2.14.0 50.79.156.221 255.255.255.248 UG 0 0 0 tunl0 44.2.14.100 50.79.156.221 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 tunl0 44.2.50.0 68.189.32.222 255.255.255.248 UG 0 0 0 tunl0 44.2.50.0 208.74.106.137 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 tunl0 44.4.2.152 173.167.109.217 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 tunl0 44.4.2.153 173.167.109.217 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 tunl0 .... More routes
Is this correct or am I dending all AMPRnet traffic through UCSD.EDU ?
-- 73 de SV1UY Demetre Ch. Valaris e-mail: demetre.sv1uy@gmail.com Radio e-mail: sv1uy@winlink.org (to use my radio e-mail put //WL2K in the beginning of the subject line) http://www.qsl.net/sv1uy _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
Hi Bill,
Thanks for reply,
Interface rose0 is a pseudo interface that runs rose protocol which is similar to netrom. I use FPAC here as well as Linuxnode. In any case this interface has a metric of 30 pointing to 44.0.0.0/8 and it is not the preferred route. All my preferred routes have metric 0.
I was really wondering if my route 44.0.0.0/0 with metric 0 should actually have as a GATEWAY UCSD.EDU (169.228.66.251), or should it have 0.0.0.0 ???
73 de SV1UY
On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 2:06 AM, William Lewis kg6baj@n1oes.org wrote:
Your routes look correct.
Traffic will follow the most 'precise' given route.
For example, lets first use a made-up route to 44.2.12.75. Since your table does not show a 'specific' subnet, it will use your rule of "44.0.0.0 169.228.66.251 255.0.0.0"
But, if you use a route to 44.2.14.3, your tables show a more precise route to that address, so your traffic will use your route rule of "44.2.14.0 50.79.156.221 255.255.255.248"
The only thing I see in your route that may or may not be of concern, is the third line. Not sure what your interface "rose0" goes too, but I see a possible conflict with the route right above it.
You basically have two (2) routes listed for traffic to 44.0.0.0/8 Other than that, that looks good.
As everyone's setups are custom, I don't know what that interface "rose0" does for your system.
Bill
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 44.0.0.0 169.228.66.251 255.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 tunl0
I think you probably shouldn't have this route as amprgw (169.228.66.251) isn't really a default route for the rest of AMPRNet -- there isn't one. AMPRNet is fully routed by the entries in the encap table and any subnet which isn't in the table is by definition not reachable. But I don't think it'll do any harm. - Brian
Brian,
My munge script adds a route command to 169.228.66.251 as a last line. It does not look right to me but if you say it does not matter then it is OK by me.
Is everyone else using a munge script? if yes could someone publish it here so that I can compare it with the one I use! Maybe I use an outdated one here.
73 de SV1UY
On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Brian Kantor Brian@ucsd.edu wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 44.0.0.0 169.228.66.251 255.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 tunl0
I think you probably shouldn't have this route as amprgw (169.228.66.251) isn't really a default route for the rest of AMPRNet -- there isn't one. AMPRNet is fully routed by the entries in the encap table and any subnet which isn't in the table is by definition not reachable. But I don't think it'll do any harm. - Brian
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
The default route to 169.228.66.251 is in most munge scripts I have seen. The motivation was that you are reachable in that way if a new gateway pops up and you don't refresh your ipip routes at a regular basis.
73,
VE3TOK
On 13-08-26 04:27 AM, Demetre SV1UY wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Brian,
My munge script adds a route command to 169.228.66.251 as a last line. It does not look right to me but if you say it does not matter then it is OK by me.
Is everyone else using a munge script? if yes could someone publish it here so that I can compare it with the one I use! Maybe I use an outdated one here.
73 de SV1UY
On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Brian Kantor Brian@ucsd.edu wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 44.0.0.0 169.228.66.251 255.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 tunl0
I think you probably shouldn't have this route as amprgw (169.228.66.251) isn't really a default route for the rest of AMPRNet -- there isn't one. AMPRNet is fully routed by the entries in the encap table and any subnet which isn't in the table is by definition not reachable. But I don't think it'll do any harm. - Brian
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
Thanks Bob.
73 de SV1UY
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Bob Tenty bobtenty@gmail.com wrote:
The default route to 169.228.66.251 is in most munge scripts I have seen. The motivation was that you are reachable in that way if a new gateway pops up and you don't refresh your ipip routes at a regular basis.
73,
VE3TOK
-
Bob Tenty -
Brian Kantor -
Demetre SV1UY -
William Lewis