Monday, June 21, 2004 9:53 AM: Craig White almost denied himself help with: > 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 OK. Now that I've taken a couple of days to cool off, let me start by pointing out the first rule of trouble shooting: NEVER ASSUME ANYTHING!!!!! Before I start explaining your problem though, I need to tell you that you are lucky I'm even keeping this thread going. You have committed what is probably the worst offense you possibly could on this list. You have projected your own bias as to the nature of your problem onto the person (in this case, very often here it is multiple people) who is trying to help you. When you receive a reply that requests more information, never, and I really mean never-ever answer back with what you THINK you know. If you are going to hamper others attempts to apply a non-biased problem determination methodology then don't bother posting the question in the first place. If you already know the answers then you don't need our help. You seem so sure that the problem isn't in your normal network definitions, yet you can't seem to find any other source of the problem. >From what you HAVE provided I can tell you categorically that your problem IS NOT openvpn and MAY be in your ifcfg-ethx configs. That having been said, let me start to explain... The routing table you present above shows absolutely nothing that points to openvpn as the culprit. All openvpn routes would utilize either a tunx or tapx interface. As you have only eth0, 1 & 2 and lo, then I seriously doubt openvpn has anything at all to do with this. What is DOES look very much like is competing gateway statements in your ifcfg-ethx configurations. I may very well be wrong, and if so, then I can accept that as part of the PD process. But if I can't see that with my own mark one eyeball, then I can't be sure either way. Hmmm, I seem to have stepped back on my soapbox... ;-) At this point I think it might be best for us to take this off the list. In order to help further I'm going to need information about your network configuration that you obviously don't want to post publicly (BTW, you missed one of your actual addresses when you scrubbed your routing table). Please contact my at the email address below if you are still interested in following this up. Eric Diamond eDiamond Networking & Security eric<at>ediamond[dot]net
