Les Mikesell escribió: > On 12/19/10 2:30 PM, Jose Maria Terry Jimenez wrote: > >>>>>> This doesn't make much sense without a route. Can you try a traceroute to the >>>>>> fedora box address from the 192.168.236.80 box to see how/why it gets there >>>>>> Hope it helps (all addresses are 192.168. Trimmed to compact the schema): >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ---------- ---------- ----------- >>>>>> ! 1.3 !------!1.100 ! !gw 236.21! >>>>>> ! gw 1.1 ! ! ! 236.74!-----! 236.80 ! >>>>>> ---------- ! ! gw 1.1 ! ! ----------- >>>>>> ! ---------- ! >>>>>> ! ! >>>>>> [Router1] [Router2] >>>>>> >>>>>> Router 1 is a PFSense and its IP is 192.168.1.1 >>>>>> Router 2 is "something" (it is managed by other person, and i think is >>>>>> somekind of win server) and IP is 192.168.236.21 >>>>>> >>>>>> > > This still doesn't explain why the 192.168.236.80 box can return packets to the > fedora at 192.168.1.3 when you said it didn't have a route going through > 192.168.236.74. Can you check what routes you do have on 192.168.236.80 and > traceroute from there to 192.168.1.3? > > Apologies by confusing you. I forgot that "the other" CentOS had 2 NICs, this is the machine where i began these tests. It's in a remote site and now when listing the routes remembered that. It's conected to the 1. network with a second NIC and IP: 192.168.1.102. Replies must be return by that iface, really? [root at control ~]# route Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.236.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 169.254.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 default 192.168.236.21 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 I Configured a printer in the 236. network to use 192.168.236.74 as gateway and now i can access it from 1. Thanks. [jose at IDi ~]$ ping 192.168.236.74 PING 192.168.236.74 (192.168.236.74) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.236.74: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.276 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.236.74: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.245 ms Thanks again Best =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Scanned with Copfilter Version 0.84beta3a (ProxSMTP 1.6) AntiVirus: ClamAV 0.95.2/12415 - Sun Dec 19 04:26:57 2010 by Markus Madlener @ http://www.copfilter.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20101219/e6bd943a/attachment-0005.html>