On Sun, 2004-06-20 at 19:29, Eric Diamond wrote: > Sunday, June 20, 2004 6:47 PM Craig White came back with: > > On Sun, 2004-06-20 at 12:20, Eric Diamond wrote: > > > > > > Hmmm. Are you using a route statement in the <tunnel>.conf files or > > > are you using a <tunnel>.up script? > > <snip> > > > I don't have any route statements in configs but the first > > sample I played with I put this line in it and I think it is > > what whacked me... > > > > #ifconfig eth1 0.0.0.0 promisc up > > > > Obviously, I can delete the extra route on eth1 that quashes > > the route on eth0 which I can then add but I can't figure out > > why they persist after reboot (or service network restart) > > Well... I'm not sure if that's it or not. > > First off, it looks like it's commented out, but even if you issued that > cleanly, it wouldn't change your routing. That's a receive-only > configuration. You would generaly configure an interface like that to > sniff on your network. You can't transmit from an interface with out an > address that is in promiscuous mode. > > If you aren't using route statements in the openvpn config files and > aren't calling .up scripts from them, then you must be setting routes in > the interface configurations. If you have gateway settings for each of > your interfaces, then they would be creating persistent, conflicting > default routes. > > Please post your openvpn .conf files, your ifcfg-ethX files and the > output of route. ----- This would all be a red herring. My ifcfg-ethX files have been unchanged for months. I have openvpn working but even if I have it off at startup, there are persistent routes that alter the configuration of the routing table (at least going by the ifcfg-ethX files). All I am asking is if anyone knows which files persistent routes are stored in (FC-1) because I can't find them. The only present fix I have is 3 lines in /etc/rc.d/rc.local... route del -net XXX.XX.90.0 netmask 255.255.255.248 dev eth1 route add -net XXX.XXX.90.0 netmask 255.255.255.248 dev eth0 route del -net 169.254.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0 dev eth1 because without them, my routing tables at bootup look like this... Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface XXX.XXX.90.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.248 U 0 0 0 eth1 XXX.XXX.90.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.248 U 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.10.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth2 169.255.10.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo 0.0.0.0 64.3.90.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1 and this routing table at bootup is a big problem Craig
