Kevin Traas wrote: > > >Hmmm. What's the netmask on the ethernet interface? If it's set to > >255.255.255.224 then everything should work fine even though > > Yes, it is.
Then NT's routing algorithm is wrong or there are other routes afoot. Run netstat -r on the NT box to verify that the routes to the ethernet interface have 255.255.255.224 as the netmask. > >the NT box sets 255.255.255.0 on the PPP link. This is because the > >routing algorithm chooses the route with the most matching bits (that > >is, the one with the longest netmask). Let me know. > > Interesting thought. I'll give this a try. > > I've got things working right now by setting up the PPP connection and then > manually setting routes on each end. However, if I can automate this, that > would be great. > > With your msg above, I may not have to make any changes on the NT dialin > box/router. I'll let you know. > > On this subject, though.... Right now, the NT box dials into the modem pool > via PPP. Is there any way I can have the Linux box (PPP "server") setup a > static route to the NT subnet at the time the NT box dials in? (I could set > up a script running in the background with a sleep 60 or so that looks to > see who's logged in and configures the routing table based on that, but this > would be quite a "hack" - there's got to be a better way....) Sure, you can give pppd the path to an "ip-up" and an "ip-down" script which will be called when the connection comes up. -- Jens B. Jorgensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
