Why do ICMP Redirct Host happen?
Posted
by
El Barto
on Server Fault
See other posts from Server Fault
or by El Barto
Published on 2012-06-25T14:07:09Z
Indexed on
2012/06/25
15:17 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 330
I'm setting up a Debian box as a router for 4 subnets. For that I have defined 4 virtual interfaces on the NIC where the LAN is connected (eth1
).
eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 94:0c:6d:82:0d:98
inet addr:10.1.1.1 Bcast:10.1.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: fe80::960c:6dff:fe82:d98/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:6026521 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:35331299 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:673201397 (642.0 MiB) TX bytes:177276932 (169.0 MiB)
Interrupt:19 Base address:0x6000
eth1:0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 94:0c:6d:82:0d:98
inet addr:10.1.2.1 Bcast:10.1.2.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
Interrupt:19 Base address:0x6000
eth1:1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 94:0c:6d:82:0d:98
inet addr:10.1.3.1 Bcast:10.1.3.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
Interrupt:19 Base address:0x6000
eth1:2 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 94:0c:6d:82:0d:98
inet addr:10.1.4.1 Bcast:10.1.4.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
Interrupt:19 Base address:0x6000
eth2 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 6c:f0:49:a4:47:38
inet addr:192.168.1.10 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: fe80::6ef0:49ff:fea4:4738/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:199809345 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:158362936 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:1
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:3656983762 (3.4 GiB) TX bytes:1715848473 (1.5 GiB)
Interrupt:27
eth3 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 94:0c:6d:82:c8:72
inet addr:192.168.2.5 Bcast:192.168.2.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: fe80::960c:6dff:fe82:c872/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:110814 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:73386 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:16044901 (15.3 MiB) TX bytes:42125647 (40.1 MiB)
Interrupt:20 Base address:0x2000
lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
RX packets:22351 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:22351 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:2625143 (2.5 MiB) TX bytes:2625143 (2.5 MiB)
tun0 Link encap:UNSPEC HWaddr 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00
inet addr:10.8.0.1 P-t-P:10.8.0.2 Mask:255.255.255.255
UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:41358924 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:23116350 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:100
RX bytes:3065505744 (2.8 GiB) TX bytes:1324358330 (1.2 GiB)
I have two other computers connected to this network. One has IP 10.1.1.12 (subnet mask 255.255.255.0) and the other one 10.1.2.20 (subnet mask 255.255.255.0). I want to be able to reach 10.1.1.12 from 10.1.2.20.
Since packet forwarding is enabled in the router and the policy of the FORWARD chain is ACCEPT (and there are no other rules), I understand that there should be no problem to ping from 10.1.2.20 to 10.1.1.12 going through the router.
However, this is what I get:
$ ping -c15 10.1.1.12
PING 10.1.1.12 (10.1.1.12): 56 data bytes
Request timeout for icmp_seq 0
92 bytes from router2.mydomain.com (10.1.2.1): Redirect Host(New addr: 10.1.1.12)
Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst
4 5 00 0054 81d4 0 0000 3f 01 e2b3 10.1.2.20 10.1.1.12
Request timeout for icmp_seq 1
92 bytes from router2.mydomain.com (10.1.2.1): Redirect Host(New addr: 10.1.1.12)
Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst
4 5 00 0054 899b 0 0000 3f 01 daec 10.1.2.20 10.1.1.12
Request timeout for icmp_seq 2
92 bytes from router2.mydomain.com (10.1.2.1): Redirect Host(New addr: 10.1.1.12)
Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst
4 5 00 0054 78fe 0 0000 3f 01 eb89 10.1.2.20 10.1.1.12
Request timeout for icmp_seq 3
92 bytes from router2.mydomain.com (10.1.2.1): Redirect Host(New addr: 10.1.1.12)
Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst
4 5 00 0054 14b8 0 0000 3f 01 4fd0 10.1.2.20 10.1.1.12
Request timeout for icmp_seq 4
92 bytes from router2.mydomain.com (10.1.2.1): Redirect Host(New addr: 10.1.1.12)
Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst
4 5 00 0054 8ef7 0 0000 3f 01 d590 10.1.2.20 10.1.1.12
Request timeout for icmp_seq 5
92 bytes from router2.mydomain.com (10.1.2.1): Redirect Host(New addr: 10.1.1.12)
Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst
4 5 00 0054 ec9d 0 0000 3f 01 77ea 10.1.2.20 10.1.1.12
Request timeout for icmp_seq 6
92 bytes from router2.mydomain.com (10.1.2.1): Redirect Host(New addr: 10.1.1.12)
Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst
4 5 00 0054 70e6 0 0000 3f 01 f3a1 10.1.2.20 10.1.1.12
Request timeout for icmp_seq 7
92 bytes from router2.mydomain.com (10.1.2.1): Redirect Host(New addr: 10.1.1.12)
Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst
4 5 00 0054 b0d2 0 0000 3f 01 b3b5 10.1.2.20 10.1.1.12
Request timeout for icmp_seq 8
92 bytes from router2.mydomain.com (10.1.2.1): Redirect Host(New addr: 10.1.1.12)
Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst
4 5 00 0054 f8b4 0 0000 3f 01 6bd3 10.1.2.20 10.1.1.12
Request timeout for icmp_seq 9
Request timeout for icmp_seq 10
92 bytes from router2.mydomain.com (10.1.2.1): Redirect Host(New addr: 10.1.1.12)
Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst
4 5 00 0054 1c95 0 0000 3f 01 47f3 10.1.2.20 10.1.1.12
Request timeout for icmp_seq 11
Request timeout for icmp_seq 12
Request timeout for icmp_seq 13
92 bytes from router2.mydomain.com (10.1.2.1): Redirect Host(New addr: 10.1.1.12)
Vr HL TOS Len ID Flg off TTL Pro cks Src Dst
4 5 00 0054 62bc 0 0000 3f 01 01cc 10.1.2.20 10.1.1.12
Why does this happen?
From what I've read the Redirect Host
response has something to do with the fact that the two hosts are in the same network and there being a shorter route (or so I understood). They are in fact in the same physical network, but why would there be a better route if they are not on the same subnet (they can't see each other)?
What am I missing?
Some extra info you might want to see:
# route -n
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
10.8.0.2 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0
127.0.0.1 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 lo
192.168.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth3
10.8.0.0 10.8.0.2 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0
192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 1 0 0 eth2
10.1.4.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
10.1.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
10.1.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
10.1.3.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth2
0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth3
# iptables -L -n
Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source destination
Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source destination
Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source destination
# iptables -L -n -t nat
Chain PREROUTING (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source destination
Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source destination
MASQUERADE all -- !10.0.0.0/8 10.0.0.0/8
MASQUERADE all -- 10.0.0.0/8 !10.0.0.0/8
Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT)
target prot opt source destination
© Server Fault or respective owner