Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (ASCEND) 5.0Ap42 for MAX products
On Wed, Feb 04, 1998 at 12:09:02PM -0600, John Coy wrote:
> One interesting thought here -- the IP address associated
> with this profile is on the SAME network segment as the
> Ethernet IF of the Ascend MAX. Is that why the Ethernet IF
> is getting the routing entry instead of the WAN XX? I do
> have Proxy ARP enabled for active sessions.
>
> This is an interesting dilemma. I'm guessing that this
> is the root of the problem.
Wow. Did they reintroduce a bug ? We have (long long ago) found out
that a route _via_ an IP that is remote due to proxy ARP is not
properly set via wanX but instead set via ie0. This was (IIRC) fixed
in later incrementals of 4.6C and officially fixed with 5.0A. Now from
what you describe it sounds like this one is back. Note that this hit
_any_ route, regardless of the routes destination, it only depended
on the gateway you specified - if the gateway was delegated out with
a proxy ARP cutout, the route pointed wrong (to ie0).
BTW, if you really need transfer nets you should look up the newer docs
on setting them up in RADIUS or the NVRAM. They are supported for a
while now and seem to work well, so no tricks with additional route
entries are needed any longer.
--
Kanther-Line: PGP SSH IDEA MD5 GOST RIPE-MD160 3DES RSA FEAL32 RC4
+-o-+--------------------------------------------------------+-o-+
| o | \\\- Brain Inside -/// | o |
| o | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | o |
| o | Andre' Beck (ABPSoft) beck@ibh-dd.de XLink PoP Dresden | o |
+-o-+--------------------------------------------------------+-o-+
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
References: