static route randomly ignored
2
I have a couple of Linux guest VMs with bridged network to my physical adapter. For a certain reason I can't use the subnet of my host machine for the guests (and virtual adapter is too slow for me), so I created a separate subnet for them.
On host I added the guest subnet:
C:> route add 192.168.20.0 mask 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.0 metric 1
On guests:
# route add -host 192.168.148.87 dev eth3 # my host ip
It mostly works:
basin@BASIN /cygdrive/c/Users/basin
$ tracert -d 192.168.20.20
Tracing route to 192.168.20.20 over a maximum of 30 hops
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.20.20
Trace complete.
basin@BASIN /cygdrive/c/Users/basin
$ tracert -d 192.168.20.21
Tracing route to 192.168.20.21 over a maximum of 30 hops
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.20.21
Trace complete.
But it looks like some packets go through the gateway:
basin@BASIN /cygdrive/c/Users/basin
$ tracert -d 192.168.20.23
Tracing route to 192.168.20.23 over a maximum of 30 hops
2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.200.1 0
3 192.168.200.1 reports: Destination host unreachable.
Trace complete.
SSH connections to the guests often stall. What am I doing wrong?
IPv4 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.149.200 192.168.148.87 20
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
192.168.20.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.148.87 21
192.168.20.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
192.168.56.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
192.168.56.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
192.168.56.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
192.168.148.0 255.255.254.0 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
192.168.148.87 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
192.168.149.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
===========================================================================
Upd:
Could it be that OS sends some ICMP request to different places and the reply overrides my static route? How to check this?
windows-7 networking
asked Jun 21 '16 at 13:01
basinbasin
265312
add a comment |
2
I have a couple of Linux guest VMs with bridged network to my physical adapter. For a certain reason I can't use the subnet of my host machine for the guests (and virtual adapter is too slow for me), so I created a separate subnet for them.
On host I added the guest subnet:
C:> route add 192.168.20.0 mask 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.0 metric 1
On guests:
# route add -host 192.168.148.87 dev eth3 # my host ip
It mostly works:
basin@BASIN /cygdrive/c/Users/basin
$ tracert -d 192.168.20.20
Tracing route to 192.168.20.20 over a maximum of 30 hops
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.20.20
Trace complete.
basin@BASIN /cygdrive/c/Users/basin
$ tracert -d 192.168.20.21
Tracing route to 192.168.20.21 over a maximum of 30 hops
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.20.21
Trace complete.
But it looks like some packets go through the gateway:
basin@BASIN /cygdrive/c/Users/basin
$ tracert -d 192.168.20.23
Tracing route to 192.168.20.23 over a maximum of 30 hops
2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.200.1 0
3 192.168.200.1 reports: Destination host unreachable.
Trace complete.
SSH connections to the guests often stall. What am I doing wrong?
IPv4 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.149.200 192.168.148.87 20
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
192.168.20.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.148.87 21
192.168.20.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
192.168.56.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
192.168.56.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
192.168.56.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
192.168.148.0 255.255.254.0 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
192.168.148.87 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
192.168.149.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
===========================================================================
Upd:
Could it be that OS sends some ICMP request to different places and the reply overrides my static route? How to check this?
windows-7 networking
asked Jun 21 '16 at 13:01
basinbasin
265312
what virtualization solution are you using? I used VirtualBox on Windows (now I am on OS X and still using VirtualBox) and it has a nice Networking part which does not need additional setup on host/guest as you described.
– Zina
Jun 21 '16 at 22:26
@Zina I use VirtualBox. I explained my case in the 1st paragraph. Bridge gives me 2.5Gbit. Other modes - 100Mbit
– basin
Jun 22 '16 at 6:37
strange you cant get more than 100Mbit with other connections. What type of adapter did you select? A 1Gb or the PCnet? And I don't see where from the hop to 192.168.200.1 came? I do not see it in your routing table.
– Zina
Jun 22 '16 at 22:45
add a comment |
2
2
2
I have a couple of Linux guest VMs with bridged network to my physical adapter. For a certain reason I can't use the subnet of my host machine for the guests (and virtual adapter is too slow for me), so I created a separate subnet for them.
On host I added the guest subnet:
C:> route add 192.168.20.0 mask 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.0 metric 1
On guests:
# route add -host 192.168.148.87 dev eth3 # my host ip
It mostly works:
basin@BASIN /cygdrive/c/Users/basin
$ tracert -d 192.168.20.20
Tracing route to 192.168.20.20 over a maximum of 30 hops
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.20.20
Trace complete.
basin@BASIN /cygdrive/c/Users/basin
$ tracert -d 192.168.20.21
Tracing route to 192.168.20.21 over a maximum of 30 hops
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.20.21
Trace complete.
But it looks like some packets go through the gateway:
basin@BASIN /cygdrive/c/Users/basin
$ tracert -d 192.168.20.23
Tracing route to 192.168.20.23 over a maximum of 30 hops
2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.200.1 0
3 192.168.200.1 reports: Destination host unreachable.
Trace complete.
SSH connections to the guests often stall. What am I doing wrong?
IPv4 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.149.200 192.168.148.87 20
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
192.168.20.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.148.87 21
192.168.20.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
192.168.56.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
192.168.56.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
192.168.56.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
192.168.148.0 255.255.254.0 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
192.168.148.87 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
192.168.149.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
===========================================================================
Upd:
Could it be that OS sends some ICMP request to different places and the reply overrides my static route? How to check this?
windows-7 networking
asked Jun 21 '16 at 13:01
basinbasin
265312
I have a couple of Linux guest VMs with bridged network to my physical adapter. For a certain reason I can't use the subnet of my host machine for the guests (and virtual adapter is too slow for me), so I created a separate subnet for them.
On host I added the guest subnet:
C:> route add 192.168.20.0 mask 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.0 metric 1
On guests:
# route add -host 192.168.148.87 dev eth3 # my host ip
It mostly works:
basin@BASIN /cygdrive/c/Users/basin
$ tracert -d 192.168.20.20
Tracing route to 192.168.20.20 over a maximum of 30 hops
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.20.20
Trace complete.
basin@BASIN /cygdrive/c/Users/basin
$ tracert -d 192.168.20.21
Tracing route to 192.168.20.21 over a maximum of 30 hops
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.20.21
Trace complete.
But it looks like some packets go through the gateway:
basin@BASIN /cygdrive/c/Users/basin
$ tracert -d 192.168.20.23
Tracing route to 192.168.20.23 over a maximum of 30 hops
2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.200.1 0
3 192.168.200.1 reports: Destination host unreachable.
Trace complete.
SSH connections to the guests often stall. What am I doing wrong?
IPv4 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.149.200 192.168.148.87 20
127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
192.168.20.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.148.87 21
192.168.20.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
192.168.56.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
192.168.56.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
192.168.56.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
192.168.148.0 255.255.254.0 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
192.168.148.87 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
192.168.149.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.148.87 276
255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.56.1 266
===========================================================================
Upd:
Could it be that OS sends some ICMP request to different places and the reply overrides my static route? How to check this?
windows-7 networking
windows-7 networking
asked Jun 21 '16 at 13:01
basinbasin
265312
asked Jun 21 '16 at 13:01
basinbasin
265312
edited Jun 21 '16 at 15:50
basin
asked Jun 21 '16 at 13:01
basinbasin
265312
asked Jun 21 '16 at 13:01
basinbasin
265312
asked Jun 21 '16 at 13:01
basinbasin
265312
265312
what virtualization solution are you using? I used VirtualBox on Windows (now I am on OS X and still using VirtualBox) and it has a nice Networking part which does not need additional setup on host/guest as you described.
– Zina
Jun 21 '16 at 22:26
@Zina I use VirtualBox. I explained my case in the 1st paragraph. Bridge gives me 2.5Gbit. Other modes - 100Mbit
– basin
Jun 22 '16 at 6:37
strange you cant get more than 100Mbit with other connections. What type of adapter did you select? A 1Gb or the PCnet? And I don't see where from the hop to 192.168.200.1 came? I do not see it in your routing table.
– Zina
Jun 22 '16 at 22:45
add a comment |
what virtualization solution are you using? I used VirtualBox on Windows (now I am on OS X and still using VirtualBox) and it has a nice Networking part which does not need additional setup on host/guest as you described.
– Zina
Jun 21 '16 at 22:26
@Zina I use VirtualBox. I explained my case in the 1st paragraph. Bridge gives me 2.5Gbit. Other modes - 100Mbit
– basin
Jun 22 '16 at 6:37
strange you cant get more than 100Mbit with other connections. What type of adapter did you select? A 1Gb or the PCnet? And I don't see where from the hop to 192.168.200.1 came? I do not see it in your routing table.
– Zina
Jun 22 '16 at 22:45
what virtualization solution are you using? I used VirtualBox on Windows (now I am on OS X and still using VirtualBox) and it has a nice Networking part which does not need additional setup on host/guest as you described.
– Zina
Jun 21 '16 at 22:26
what virtualization solution are you using? I used VirtualBox on Windows (now I am on OS X and still using VirtualBox) and it has a nice Networking part which does not need additional setup on host/guest as you described.
– Zina
Jun 21 '16 at 22:26
@Zina I use VirtualBox. I explained my case in the 1st paragraph. Bridge gives me 2.5Gbit. Other modes - 100Mbit
– basin
Jun 22 '16 at 6:37
@Zina I use VirtualBox. I explained my case in the 1st paragraph. Bridge gives me 2.5Gbit. Other modes - 100Mbit
– basin
Jun 22 '16 at 6:37
strange you cant get more than 100Mbit with other connections. What type of adapter did you select? A 1Gb or the PCnet? And I don't see where from the hop to 192.168.200.1 came? I do not see it in your routing table.
– Zina
Jun 22 '16 at 22:45
strange you cant get more than 100Mbit with other connections. What type of adapter did you select? A 1Gb or the PCnet? And I don't see where from the hop to 192.168.200.1 came? I do not see it in your routing table.
– Zina
Jun 22 '16 at 22:45
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1
Static routes are only used if the target address is not on directly connected network. In your case all hosts are on directly connected networks, so the static routes are ignored.
answered Jan 9 at 14:40
ThunderbelchThunderbelch
111
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "3"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1091775%2fstatic-route-randomly-ignored%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
1
Static routes are only used if the target address is not on directly connected network. In your case all hosts are on directly connected networks, so the static routes are ignored.
answered Jan 9 at 14:40
ThunderbelchThunderbelch
111
add a comment |
1
Static routes are only used if the target address is not on directly connected network. In your case all hosts are on directly connected networks, so the static routes are ignored.
answered Jan 9 at 14:40
ThunderbelchThunderbelch
111
add a comment |
1
1
1
Static routes are only used if the target address is not on directly connected network. In your case all hosts are on directly connected networks, so the static routes are ignored.
answered Jan 9 at 14:40
ThunderbelchThunderbelch
111
Static routes are only used if the target address is not on directly connected network. In your case all hosts are on directly connected networks, so the static routes are ignored.
answered Jan 9 at 14:40
ThunderbelchThunderbelch
111
answered Jan 9 at 14:40
ThunderbelchThunderbelch
111
answered Jan 9 at 14:40
ThunderbelchThunderbelch
111
answered Jan 9 at 14:40
ThunderbelchThunderbelch
111
111
add a comment |
add a comment |
draft saved
draft discarded
Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1091775%2fstatic-route-randomly-ignored%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
what virtualization solution are you using? I used VirtualBox on Windows (now I am on OS X and still using VirtualBox) and it has a nice Networking part which does not need additional setup on host/guest as you described.
– Zina
Jun 21 '16 at 22:26
@Zina I use VirtualBox. I explained my case in the 1st paragraph. Bridge gives me 2.5Gbit. Other modes - 100Mbit
– basin
Jun 22 '16 at 6:37
strange you cant get more than 100Mbit with other connections. What type of adapter did you select? A 1Gb or the PCnet? And I don't see where from the hop to 192.168.200.1 came? I do not see it in your routing table.
– Zina
Jun 22 '16 at 22:45