Yes the assumption was correct, Thanks mate. thank you all for your
advices. i really appreciate
On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 6:26 PM, Muhammad Yousuf Khan
wrote:
> Yes the assumption was correct, Thanks mate. thank you all for your
> advices. i really appreciate
>
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 2:16 PM,
Muhammad Yousuf Khan schreef op 28-12-2016 8:10:
Thanks issue is resolved. as i mentioned tcpdump command not receving
packets from ISP gateway. thus we discussed this matter with ISP and
the restarted the router. and things got fixed. it seems that ISP
router keeps the old MAC entries thats why
Thanks issue is resolved. as i mentioned tcpdump command not receving
packets from ISP gateway. thus we discussed this matter with ISP and the
restarted the router. and things got fixed. it seems that ISP router keeps
the old MAC entries thats why it didn't worked
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 8:41 PM,
Muhammad Yousuf Khan schreef op 27-12-2016 15:15:
Thanks this is what i already did and i was about to send you guys the
details and fortunately your msg comes in.
tcpdump is telling me very interesting story.
when i 'tcpdump -i eth3 icmp' it shows all the ping packet that are
received for ip 50.
Le 27/12/2016 à 15:15, Muhammad Yousuf Khan a écrit :
tcpdump is telling me very interesting story.
when i 'tcpdump -i eth3 icmp' it shows all the ping packet that are
received for ip 50.x.x161 but not for 50.x.x.162
What about ARP packets ?
Thanks this is what i already did and i was about to send you guys the
details and fortunately your msg comes in.
tcpdump is telling me very interesting story.
when i 'tcpdump -i eth3 icmp' it shows all the ping packet that are
received for ip 50.x.x161 but not for 50.x.x.162
that means ISP gateway
Muhammad Yousuf Khan schreef op 27-12-2016 13:58:
I didnt route anything as default gateway was already there. can you
please explain your routes more. i didnt get the context of that
routes you define.
Nothing special there, if you use the same gateway it won't be needed. I
just have a 2nd IP
one more thing i can ping to gateway with virtual ip no problem.
hping3 -1 50.x.x.174 -a 50.x.x.162
HPING 50.x.x.174 (eth3 50.x.x.174): icmp mode set, 28 headers + 0 data bytes
len=46 ip=50.x.x.174 ttl=64 id=56571 icmp_seq=0 rtt=3.4 ms
len=46 ip=50.x.x.174 ttl=64 id=56572 icmp_seq=1 rtt=3.3 ms
len
btw i never use ip command due to its complexity. i user route command
instead. which is way more easier. however i tried your commands and it
didn't work for me any help or idea guys?
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Muhammad Yousuf Khan
wrote:
> I didnt route anything as default gateway was a
I didnt route anything as default gateway was already there. can you please
explain your routes more. i didnt get the context of that routes you
define.
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Xen wrote:
> Muhammad Yousuf Khan schreef op 27-12-2016 12:22:
>
> can you guys please guide what is going on
Muhammad Yousuf Khan schreef op 27-12-2016 12:22:
can you guys please guide what is going on . in old Debian version i
do this with no problem sub interfaces were very easy task. but here i
invest the whole day.
I must say I have run into many problems on my own machine but never
this one.
adding further i can ping the virtual interfaces from local network and
through vpn users
but can not ping public IPs
.
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Muhammad Yousuf Khan
wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I want to reach sub interface ip from internet but i can not ping no
> matter what i do.
>
>
> inet
Dear All,
I want to reach sub interface ip from internet but i can not ping no matter
what i do.
inet 50.x.x.161/28 brd 50.255.203.175 scope global eth3 valid_lft forever
preferred_lft forever
inet 50.x.x.162/28 brd 50.255.203.175 scope global secondary eth3:1
ce public ip which is set up like
13 matches
Mail list logo
