>
> Has the cisco home router got more routes than you mention?
No.
> You said:
>
> Cisco 760 (home) ISDN router IP 10.0.1.254 routing 0.0.0/0 to gateway
> 10.0.2.254
>
> But I think this should be:
>
> 10.0.2.0/24 -> your other cisco (10.0.2.254?)
I assume this route should be on the home cisco
> 0.0.0.0/0 -> 10.0.1.221 (your linux box - the internet routes through
> there).
while this one should be on the remote cisco. Am I correct?
I have tried this on my remote, but the 10.0.1.221 is a NIC card in my linux
firewall, and I believe that
it does not answer to the routed 10.0.2.x packets. I probably am missing
some ipfwadm rules.
>
> The only problem with this is that the first route's recursive. Are you
> using
> a numbered or unnumbered link from the CISCO? (ie has each end of
> the lan line got it's own IP address).
I am using an unnumbered WAN, but each LAN has its own IP as follows:
Home IP 10.0.1.254
remote IP 10.0.2.254
If not, then you should be OK with
> the
> above, think of the pair of ciscos as one router from IP's point of view.
>
The 2 subnets can see each other. The problem I think is with the linux
firewall.
> Martin.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Masq maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://tiffany.indyramp.com/mailman/listinfo/masq
> Admin requests can be handled by web (above) or
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Masq maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://tiffany.indyramp.com/mailman/listinfo/masq
Admin requests can be handled by web (above) or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
