G'morning!<br><br>Here's a scenario I'm looking at... I run OpenSwan on Linux connected to a few other devices (the one on topic is a Cisco). I have one VPN like so:<br><br>me: <a href="http://192.168.38.0/24">192.168.38.0/24</a> other: <a href="http://192.168.5.0/24">192.168.5.0/24</a><br clear="all">
<br>There's a printer at 192.168.5.40 which I can access. The "other" side also has a subnet <a href="http://10.100.50.0/24">10.100.50.0/24</a> on their end, to which - of course - I have no access. They setup a new printer at 10.100.50.52 and want me to access it. So, I *should* be able to add a route to the 10.x subnet and send it via 192.168.5.1, which the box should know how to reach because of the vpn. Well, I can't. <br>
<br>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>[me@gateway dude]# route -n<br>Kernel IP routing table<br>Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface<br>
<omit><br>192.168.5.0 my.def.gw.ip 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 ipsec0<br><omit><br>[me@gateway gpena]# route add -net 10.100.50.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.5.1 dev ipsec0<br>SIOCADDRT: Network is unreachable<br>
[root@gateway dude]# route add -net 10.100.50.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 gw 192.168.5.1<br>SIOCADDRT: Network is unreachable<br>[root@gateway dude]#<br>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>In my mind, it's both logical and should be possible. Then again, this is the same mind that told me it was okay to have 6 kids... ;-)<br><br>Any thoughts?<br>G-<br><br>-- <br><br>Ubber::Geek <br><a href="http://grlug.org/">http://grlug.org/</a><br>