[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B54D192.5050503@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 13:24:34 -0800
From: Dyadya Skrudzh <gorshkov@...il.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Policy-routing of locally originated traffic?
Hello.
Short version: Is it possible?
Long question: read on!
I'm trying to do some weird thing, here. There's dynamips running on my
F11 box
(kernel 2.6.30.10-105.fc11.i586) emulating Cisco 7200 router with two
FastEthernets.
Interfaces are connected as:
f0/0 is attached to tap10 on Linux
f0/1 is attached to tap20 on Linux
IP addresses are:
tap10: 10.10.0.1/16
f0/0: 10.10.0.2/16
f0/1: 10.20.0.2/16
tap20: 10.20.0.1/16
Policy routing configured as:
[root@lab ~]# ip rule
0: from all lookup local
32764: from 10.20.0.1 to 10.10.0.0/16 lookup tap20
32765: from 10.10.0.1 to 10.20.0.0/16 lookup tap10
32766: from all lookup main
32767: from all lookup default
[root@lab ~]# ip route show table tap10
default via 10.10.0.2 dev tap10
[root@lab ~]# ip route show table tap20
default via 10.20.0.2 dev tap20
Interfaces, Linux:
[root@lab ~]# ip addr show dev tap10
7: tap10: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast
state UNKNOWN qlen 500
link/ether 00:50:56:a7:5d:07 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 10.10.0.1/16 brd 10.10.255.255 scope global tap10
inet6 fe80::250:56ff:fea7:5d07/64 scope link
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
[root@lab ~]# ip addr show dev tap20
8: tap20: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast
state UNKNOWN qlen 500
link/ether 00:50:56:b7:5b:b2 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 10.20.0.1/16 brd 10.20.255.255 scope global tap20
inet6 fe80::250:56ff:feb7:5bb2/64 scope link
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
Interfaces, Cisco:
interface FastEthernet0/0
ip address 10.10.0.2 255.255.0.0
no ip proxy-arp
!
interface FastEthernet0/1
ip address 10.20.0.2 255.255.0.0
no ip proxy-arp
Here's the results I got:
[ next hop, OK ]
[root@lab ~]# ip route flush cache ; ping -c 3 -I 10.10.0.1 10.10.0.2 ;
ip route show cache
PING 10.10.0.2 (10.10.0.2) from 10.10.0.1 : 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.10.0.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=2.50 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.0.2: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=1.89 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.0.2: icmp_seq=3 ttl=255 time=2.06 ms
--- 10.10.0.2 ping statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2003ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.892/2.152/2.505/0.264 ms
10.10.0.2 from 10.10.0.1 dev tap10
cache mtu 1500 advmss 1460 hoplimit 64
local 10.10.0.1 from 10.10.0.2 dev lo src 10.10.0.1
cache <local,src-direct> iif tap10
[ another interface on Cisco, OK ]
[root@lab ~]# ip route flush cache ; ping -c 3 -I 10.10.0.1 10.20.0.2 ;
ip route show cache
PING 10.20.0.2 (10.20.0.2) from 10.10.0.1 : 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.20.0.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=2.92 ms
64 bytes from 10.20.0.2: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=2.05 ms
64 bytes from 10.20.0.2: icmp_seq=3 ttl=255 time=2.05 ms
--- 10.20.0.2 ping statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2003ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 2.057/2.348/2.928/0.410 ms
10.20.0.2 from 10.10.0.1 via 10.10.0.2 dev tap10
cache mtu 1500 advmss 1460 hoplimit 64
local 10.10.0.1 from 10.20.0.2 dev lo src 10.10.0.1
cache <local> iif tap10
[ tap10 -> tap20 interface through Cisco. Does not work; ping is OK but
route is local ]
[root@lab ~]# ip route flush cache ; ping -c 3 -I 10.10.0.1 10.20.0.1 ;
ip route show cache
PING 10.20.0.1 (10.20.0.1) from 10.10.0.1 : 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.20.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.052 ms
64 bytes from 10.20.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.022 ms
64 bytes from 10.20.0.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.021 ms
--- 10.20.0.1 ping statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2000ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.021/0.031/0.052/0.015 ms
local 10.20.0.1 from 10.10.0.1 dev lo
cache <local> mtu 16436 advmss 16396 hoplimit 64
local 10.10.0.1 from 10.20.0.1 dev lo
cache <local> ipid 0xe686 mtu 16436 advmss 16396 hoplimit 64
Is there any way I can make it work?
Thank you,
DS
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists