IP routing/forwarding
-
Hi, I dont know if the term routing and forwarding are similar such that after I use the following command ROUTE -p ADD 192.168.1.4 MASK 255.255.255.255 192 192,168.1.111 and I ping 192.168.1.4 I would get a reply from the 192.168.1.111 any clarafication appreciated Thanks
-
Hi, I dont know if the term routing and forwarding are similar such that after I use the following command ROUTE -p ADD 192.168.1.4 MASK 255.255.255.255 192 192,168.1.111 and I ping 192.168.1.4 I would get a reply from the 192.168.1.111 any clarafication appreciated Thanks
-
See here[^] for some helpful information; found by our good friend Google.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman
the route command seems to take a IP address and point it to a gateway If I want all traffic directed to 192.168.1.4 to be forwarded to 192.168.1.111 (192.168.1.111) is a IP on my laptop is route -p add 192.168.1.4 MASK 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.111 seems like the the proper command to do this And if the commands takes how do I know its working I assumed pinging 192.168.1.4 When I do that I get following message Pinging 192.168.1.4 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 192.168.1.111: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.111: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.111: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.111: Destination host unreachable. Ping statistics for 192.168.1.4: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
-
the route command seems to take a IP address and point it to a gateway If I want all traffic directed to 192.168.1.4 to be forwarded to 192.168.1.111 (192.168.1.111) is a IP on my laptop is route -p add 192.168.1.4 MASK 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.111 seems like the the proper command to do this And if the commands takes how do I know its working I assumed pinging 192.168.1.4 When I do that I get following message Pinging 192.168.1.4 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 192.168.1.111: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.111: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.111: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.111: Destination host unreachable. Ping statistics for 192.168.1.4: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
ForNow wrote:
the route command seems to take a IP address and point it to a gateway
That's exactly what is explained in the the link I posted above.
ForNow wrote:
If I want all traffic directed to 192.168.1.4 to be forwarded to 192.168.1.111
That's not what the route command is for.
ForNow wrote:
Reply from 192.168.1.111: Destination host unreachable.
Exactly, because you have not created a route to the destination.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman
-
ForNow wrote:
the route command seems to take a IP address and point it to a gateway
That's exactly what is explained in the the link I posted above.
ForNow wrote:
If I want all traffic directed to 192.168.1.4 to be forwarded to 192.168.1.111
That's not what the route command is for.
ForNow wrote:
Reply from 192.168.1.111: Destination host unreachable.
Exactly, because you have not created a route to the destination.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman
-
So how would I route 192.168.1.4 traffic to 192.168.1.111 192.168.1.111 (being the IP on my laptop 192.168.1.1 being the gateway) I thought the command route -p ADD 192.168.1.4 MASK 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.111 does that
No, the route command tells the network layer how to get from a source IP address to a destination, by giving the address of a gateway. It does not reroute all messages destined for an IP address and send them somewhere different.
ForNow wrote:
I thought the command route -p ADD 192.168.1.4 MASK 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.111 does that
In your example above you are saying that the route to destination address 192.168.1.4 can be found by sending messages through the gateway at address 192.168.1.111. The gateway machine is a message forwarder, not an alternative endpoint.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman
-
No, the route command tells the network layer how to get from a source IP address to a destination, by giving the address of a gateway. It does not reroute all messages destined for an IP address and send them somewhere different.
ForNow wrote:
I thought the command route -p ADD 192.168.1.4 MASK 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.111 does that
In your example above you are saying that the route to destination address 192.168.1.4 can be found by sending messages through the gateway at address 192.168.1.111. The gateway machine is a message forwarder, not an alternative endpoint.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman
-
In other words the gateway for 192.168.1.111 Which in my case is 192.168.1.1. Would be the gateway address for 192.168.1.4
Sorry, I don't understand what you are saying here. What it comes down to is that you cannot change the destination IP address by means of the route command.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman