Getting at a machine behind a ISDN router

[Carlos Sousa]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 11:19:18 +0200 Guus Sliepen <guus at sliepen.eu.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 11:43:49PM +0100, Carlos Sousa wrote:
> 
> > Pinging the client machine (10.0.2.1) from the server machine (10.0.1.1)
> > and running iptraf on the server shows traffic between the 2 machines,
> > both ways, but the packets are still lost. I smell a routing problem
> > concerning the echo-reply packets that are arriving at server, but I can't
> > see where.
> 
> Could you show us the full "route -n" and "ifconfig -a" output and
> tinc.conf for both vbc and miragaia? Also, the output of "iptables -L -v
> -x -n" if there's a firewall on either host.

I'll only have physical access to miragaia tomorrow (a problem I was hoping
to solve with tinc :), so I'll do it then.

I corrected -d 10 to -d10 as you suggested, and the logs are showing:

tinc.vbcnet[2189]: tincd 1.0pre8 (Sep 17 2002 13:46:46) starting, debug level 10
tinc.vbcnet[2189]: /dev/net/tun is a Linux tun/tap device
tinc.vbcnet[2189]: Executing script tinc-up
tinc.vbcnet[2189]: Ignored signal 17 (Child exited)
tinc.vbcnet[2189]: Checkpoint trace: process.c:253 <- conf.c:199 <- conf.c:122 <-
conf.c:199 <- conf.c:122 <- device.c:76 <- conf.c:183 <- conf.c:122 <-
protocol.c:190 <- event.c:54 <- edge.c:69 <- node.c:63 <- subnet.c:127 <-
connection.c:72 <- connection.c:52 <- net_setup.c:526...
tinc.vbcnet[2189]: Listening on 0.0.0.0 port 655
tinc.vbcnet[2189]: Ready

Perhaps this signals a problem with my tinc-up script? It's:

   ifconfig $INTERFACE hw ether fe:fd:0:0:0:0
   ifconfig $INTERFACE 10.0.1.1 netmask 255.255.0.0
   ifconfig $INTERFACE -arp

> > There is something I find suspicious here: tinc says it's listening on
> > 0.0.0.0 is this right? shouldn't it be listening on 10.0.1.1?
> 
> No. It tells you on which address it listens for connections from other
> tinc daemons, not on which address(es) for VPN packets.

So the "listening on 0.0.0.0" is right? Since I use "BindToInterface = eth0",
shouldn't it be the actual IP assigned to eth0?

Thanks for the help.

-- 
Carlos Sousa
http://vbc.dyndns.org/
Tinc:         Discussion list about the tinc VPN daemon
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/
Tinc site:    http://tinc.nl.linux.org/