On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 06:45:56AM +0700, Robert Elz wrote: > Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 17:25:15 +0100 > From: Patrick Welche <prlw1%cam.ac.uk@localhost> > Message-ID: <20170512162515.GB14949@quartz> > > | The puzzle is: while sitting at 192.168.1.2, why can I ping 192.168.2.2 > | but not 192.168.2.1? > > I suspect you may be missing (in the export RUMP_SERVER=$sock_gw block) > something equivalent to > rump.sysctl -w net.inet.ip.forwarding=1 > (add -q if you like.) (I don't know if there is a rump.sysctl, but there > must be a mechanism to allow that to be done...) > > And while the little diagram you drew might be a logical descr of what > you're configuring, I think a more accurate one would be: > > # > # =================================================================== > # | | | > # | +---------------------------+ | > # int 192.168.1.2 + 192.168.1.1 192.168.2.1 + ext 192.168.2.2 > # | gw | > # +---------------------------+ > > gw would need to be configured with shmif0 & shmif1 to accurately > model the original diagram. Not that this should really matter > to the test you tried. Thank you - that was what I was missing! (Implementation not matching diagram) Re the ip.forwarding - I was hit by the POLS: it seems to default to 1, at least the experiment attached prints 1, which was unexpected... Cheers, Patrick
Attachment:
tworoute.sh
Description: Bourne shell script