Re: [Openvpn-users] a stupid problem.

["Paul Hardin" <hill.hobbit@xxxxxxxxx>]

Darn!  That would have been so nice, if it were that simple. :-)

In that case, your routing looks good to me, at the kernel level, how about the "iroute" directive needed to make the internal routing work? If you have that in place, then it looks  like you and I are having very similar problems with OpenVPN. :-(

To all, "is there any way to see what OpenVPN thinks its internal routing is?"

Paul H.

On 2/5/07, Mauro Sanna < mauro.sanna@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Il giorno lun, 05/02/2007 alle 08.40 -0800, Paul Hardin ha scritto:
> Mauro,
>
> It appears you have conflicting routes on your home machine:
> 10.8.0.5    *          255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0 tun0
> 192.168.100.1   *      255.255.255.255 UH    0      0        0 ppp0
> 10.8.0.1     10.8.0.5   255.255.255.255 UGH   0      0        0 tun0
>
> 172.16.10.0     10.8.0.5   255.255.255.0   UG    0      0    0 tun1
> default     *          0.0.0.0         U     0      0        0 ppp0
>
> Here it seems you have told your machine to look for 10.8.0.5 out of
> tun0. Then you turn around and tell it that the gateway for the
> 172.16.10.0 subnet is 10.8.0.5 (same as above) but is to be found out
> tun1.
>
> This may not be "the problem" but it is a problem.

Sorry it's my error, the gateway for the subnet 172.16.10.0 is on tun0.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier.

_______________________________________________
Openvpn-users mailing list
Openvpn-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-users