Re: "no route to host" from pkg_add

On 2018-08-10, Henry Bonath wrote: > Also could it be that you are using IPv6, not IPv4? (and your IPv6 is > missing its gateway) > If the IPv6 gateway is bad/missing you'll get that "no route to host" > message. This is for fastly.cdn.openbsd.org which is cnamed to os

Re: "no route to host" from pkg_add

On 2018-08-11, Walt wrote: > On August 10, 2018 3:57 PM, Henry Bonath he...@thebonaths.com wrote: > >> Also could it be that you are using IPv6, not IPv4? (and your IPv6 is >> missing its gateway) >> If the IPv6 gateway is bad/missing you'll get that "no r

Re: "no route to host" from pkg_add

On 2018-08-11, Daniel Ouellet wrote: > Hi, > > I am not sure you got that right. > > If you are an ISP the minimum assignment is /32 and you assigned /48 to > end company and /56 to users. > > If you asked me that's a wasted, but that's what they suggest. > > For end users, a /64 would be plenty i

Re: "no route to host" from pkg_add

gt; Hope this help you some. > > Daniel. > > > On 8/10/18 9:12 PM, Walt wrote: >> On August 10, 2018 3:57 PM, Henry Bonath he...@thebonaths.com wrote: >> >>> Also could it be that you are using IPv6, not IPv4? (and your IPv6 is >>> missing its gate

Re: "no route to host" from pkg_add

..@thebonaths.com wrote: > >> Also could it be that you are using IPv6, not IPv4? (and your IPv6 is >> missing its gateway) >> If the IPv6 gateway is bad/missing you'll get that "no route to host" >> message. > > I've encountered that issue before,

Re: "no route to host" from pkg_add

6 for real. > > I got my assignment in 2003 and the policy still haven't changed. > > Hope this help you some. > > Daniel. > > > On 8/10/18 9:12 PM, Walt wrote: >> On August 10, 2018 3:57 PM, Henry Bonath he...@thebonaths.com wrote: >> >>> Als

Re: "no route to host" from pkg_add

On August 10, 2018 3:57 PM, Henry Bonath he...@thebonaths.com wrote: > Also could it be that you are using IPv6, not IPv4? (and your IPv6 is > missing its gateway) > If the IPv6 gateway is bad/missing you'll get that "no route to host" > message. I've encountered

Re: "no route to host" from pkg_add

Also could it be that you are using IPv6, not IPv4? (and your IPv6 is missing its gateway) If the IPv6 gateway is bad/missing you'll get that "no route to host" message. On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 4:31 PM, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2018-08-07, traveller wrote: > > Aft

Re: "no route to host" from pkg_add

ew days, I get an error message when running pkg_add, "no route >> to host". >> I have tried setting various hosts in /etc/installurl, but the problem >> remains. >> >> When I run pkg_add, this is the output I get I get: >> [20:02|root@myhost:~]# p

Re: "no route to host" from pkg_add

te: Hello everyone, I recently installed OpenBSD 6.3 in a VPS. In the last few days, I get an error message when running pkg_add, "no route to host". I have tried setting various hosts in /etc/installurl, but the problem remains. When I run pkg_add, this is the output I get I get

Re: "no route to host" from pkg_add

After OpenBSD, one too many “/“ On Aug 7, 2018, 11:16 AM -0700, Benjamin Walkenhorst , wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I recently installed OpenBSD 6.3 in a VPS. > > In the last few days, I get an error message when running pkg_add, "no route > to host". > I have trie

Re: "no route to host" from pkg_add

вт, 7 авг. 2018 г., 21:16 Benjamin Walkenhorst < walkenhorst.benja...@gmail.com>: > Hello everyone, > > I recently installed OpenBSD 6.3 in a VPS. > > In the last few days, I get an error message when running pkg_add, "no > route to host". > I have tried set

"no route to host" from pkg_add

Hello everyone, I recently installed OpenBSD 6.3 in a VPS. In the last few days, I get an error message when running pkg_add, "no route to host". I have tried setting various hosts in /etc/installurl, but the problem remains. When I run pkg_add, this is the output I get I get: [

Re: no route to host (when there is a route )

Ingo , Martin, All, i can confirm when the issue occured the command arp -s gateway-ip-address gateway-mac-address worked to restore connectivity Cheers, Tom Smyth On 1 May 2018 at 21:16, Tom Smyth wrote: > Hello Ingo, Martin,All, > > I think you hit the nail on the head, (I was too busy l

Re: no route to host (when there is a route )

Hello Ingo, Martin,All, I think you hit the nail on the head, (I was too busy looking at the routing table (and forgot the fundamental principle of longest prefix match) so if I have a static arp entry before adding in the (more specific than the connected route) i should be OK just to explain

Re: no route to host (when there is a route )

On 01/05/18(Tue) 21:28, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > [...] > So what you are doing seems fragile to me. It may sometimes work > due to order of configuration, timeouts, whatever, i'm not sure. It can work if the ARP entry, what Ingo called the /32 is created before you add your /23. > But once part o

Re: no route to host (when there is a route )

Hi Tom, i think i am able to reproduce your problem on -current: # sh /etc/netstart em0 # route -n show -inet default192.168.2.1UGS00 - 8 em0 192.168.2/24 192.168.2.100 UCn10 - 4 em0 192.168.2.1link#1

Re: no route to host (when there is a route )

on broadcast network to route to each other > ie if a client wants to talk to another client send packet to default > gateway > (icmp redirects are off on the gateway) > > the output of ping and arp when it happens are as follows > # ping 5.134.92.1 > PING 5.134.92.1 (5.134.92.1

no route to host (when there is a route )

ping: sendto: No route to host ping: wrote 5.134.92.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: No route to host ping: wrote 5.134.92.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: No route to host ping: wrote 5.134.92.1 64 chars, ret=-1 --- 5.134.92.1 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0

Re: VLAN configuration problem on 6.1 ("no route to host" on other than own IP)

172.16.210.1   HPb    0    0 - 1 > carp0 > 172.16.211/24  172.16.211.3   UCn    0 1215 - 4 > vlan211 > 172.16.211.3       a0:36:9f:36:49:e6  UHLl   0    0 - 1 > vlan211 > 172.16.211.255 172.16.211.3   UHb    0   

Re: VLAN configuration problem on 6.1 ("no route to host" on other than own IP)

   0 - > 1 carp0 > 172.16.211/24  172.16.211.3   UCn    0 1215 - > 4 vlan211 > 172.16.211.3   a0:36:9f:36:49:e6  UHLl   0    0 - > 1 vlan211 > 172.16.211.255 172.16.211.3   UHb    0    0 - > 1 vlan211

VLAN configuration problem on 6.1 ("no route to host" on other than own IP)

- 1 vlan211 172.16.211.255 172.16.211.3 UHb00 - 1 vlan211 - My problem: I am only able to ping myself (VLAN 211) - end I _don't_ think it's a switch problem - because I get an "no route to host"

"send_packet: No route to host" during DHCP request renewal

607]: send_packet: No route to host Jan 9 23:32:31 egeo dhclient[58607]: DHCPREQUEST on axe0 to 255.255.255.255 Jan 9 23:32:31 egeo dhclient[58607]: DHCPACK from 2.238.176.1 (78:19:f7:45:d7:c1) Jan 9 23:32:31 egeo dhclient[58607]: bound to 2.238.176.236 -- renewal in 14340 seconds. [s

Re: tftp - no route to host (Solved)

On 01/10/2013 05:24 PM, lilit-aibolit wrote: On 05/01/2011 10:13 AM, Henning Brauer wrote: * Emille Blanc [2011-04-30 19:56]: since TFTP uses UDP, pf won't create a state wrong. Hello, I'm stuck again with "no route to host" # uname -a OpenBSD gw 5.2 GENERIC.MP#33

Re: tftp - no route to host

On 05/01/2011 10:13 AM, Henning Brauer wrote: * Emille Blanc [2011-04-30 19:56]: since TFTP uses UDP, pf won't create a state wrong. Hello, I'm stuck again with "no route to host" # uname -a OpenBSD gw 5.2 GENERIC.MP#339 i386 # ls -la /usr/tftpboot/ total 12728 drwxrw

Re: "No route to host"

problem, i think it's linked with PF, but i have no > >proofs. System is OpenBSD 5.1 but OpenBSD 5.2 get the same things (with > >different card, 5.1 uses bnx and 5.2 use em) > >I have a router with squid proxy, named and isc-dhcpd. The problem is, > >sometimes i get

Re: "No route to host"

it's linked with PF, but i have no > >proofs. System is OpenBSD 5.1 but OpenBSD 5.2 get the same things (with > >different card, 5.1 uses bnx and 5.2 use em) > >I have a router with squid proxy, named and isc-dhcpd. The problem is, > >sometimes i get "no route to hos

Re: "No route to host"

d proxy, named and isc-dhcpd. The problem is, >sometimes i get "no route to host" for some transmissions (often on the >proxy), but randomly. Our connexion is perfectly stable (Renater 1Gbit >fiber connection), and the routes are static and right. >When squid says no route to

"No route to host"

i get "no route to host" for some transmissions (often on the proxy), but randomly. Our connexion is perfectly stable (Renater 1Gbit fiber connection), and the routes are static and right. When squid says no route to host and i refresh the page, it works. I think it's a packet filt

Re: dhcpd sending sync message failed: no route to host

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Stuart Henderson wrote: > 2. a PF rule blocking the traffic > > confirm by using 'log' on your block rules, and watching > 'tcpdump -neipflog0' This. I have a default deny "block log" rule already in place, and while a tcpdump watch doesn't yield any block of dhc

Re: dhcpd sending sync message failed: no route to host

On 2011-06-15, Zak Elep wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:17 PM, Zak Elep > wrote: >> The firewalls are on the same subnet, and mtrace tells me they are >> directly connected. > > And I tried 'dhcpd -y rl1 -Y rl1' now, sync seems to work > without trouble (

Re: dhcpd sending sync message failed: no route to host

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:17 PM, Zak Elep wrote: > The firewalls are on the same subnet, and mtrace tells me they are > directly connected. And I tried 'dhcpd -y rl1 -Y rl1' now, sync seems to work without trouble (there's no "no route to host" message.) Am I mis

Re: dhcpd sending sync message failed: no route to host

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Remco wrote: > I think by default your (inet4) multicast routing entry looks like: > 224/4 127.0.0.1 URS00 33160 8 lo0 > Notice the R flag, AFAICT this means that traffic matching this rule will be > rejected. > > After con

Re: dhcpd sending sync message failed: no route to host

> xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx -> ip 192.168.x.xxx, start xx, end xx > Jun 14 16:33:40 exia dhcpd[31967]: sending sync message failed: No route > to host > I'm not using this for DHCP but this is my experience with multicast so far: I think by default your (inet4) multicast routing en

Re: dhcpd sending sync message failed: no route to host

NC_LEASE for hw > xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx -> ip 192.168.x.xxx, start xx, end xx > Jun 14 16:33:40 exia dhcpd[31967]: sending sync message failed: No route to host BTW I'm running "dhcpd -y rl1 -Y rl1 rl1". -- Zak B. Elep || orangeandbronze.com 1486 7957 454D E529 E4F1 F75E 5787 B1FD FA53 851D

dhcpd sending sync message failed: no route to host

31967]: sending sync message failed: No route to host -- Zak B. Elep || orangeandbronze.com 1486 7957 454D E529 E4F1 F75E 5787 B1FD FA53 851D

Re: tftp - no route to host

* Emille Blanc [2011-04-30 19:56]: > since TFTP uses UDP, pf won't create a state wrong. -- Henning Brauer, h...@bsws.de, henn...@openbsd.org BS Web Services, http://bsws.de Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting

Re: tftp - no route to host

On 11-04-30 11:02 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote: On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:52:21AM -0700, Emille Blanc wrote: On 11-04-29 12:08 AM, pavel pocheptsov wrote: pass in on $int_if inet proto udp from any to $int_if port tftp You do have a pass out rule in pf, right? I'm assuming you have a default bloc

Re: tftp - no route to host

On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:52:21AM -0700, Emille Blanc wrote: > On 11-04-29 12:08 AM, pavel pocheptsov wrote: > >pass in on $int_if inet proto udp from any to $int_if port tftp > You do have a pass out rule in pf, right? > I'm assuming you have a default block in place somewhere, and since > TFTP

Re: tftp - no route to host

On 11-04-29 12:08 AM, pavel pocheptsov wrote: pass in on $int_if inet proto udp from any to $int_if port tftp You do have a pass out rule in pf, right? I'm assuming you have a default block in place somewhere, and since TFTP uses UDP, pf won't create a state so you'll need an explicit pass out.

Re: tftp - no route to host

ar/log/daemon Apr 29 17:54:14 ipsec2 dhcpd[24382]: DHCPREQUEST for 192.168.15.155 from 6c:62:6d:0c:56:f9 via rl0 Apr 29 17:54:14 ipsec2 dhcpd[24382]: DHCPACK on 192.168.15.155 to 6c:62:6d:0c:56:f9 via rl0 Apr 29 17:54:55 ipsec2 tftpd[17823]: send: No route to host Apr 29 17:54:56 ipsec2 tftpd[738

Re: tftp - no route to host

Sorry, I've missed your netstat output, ignore part of my previous mail :) On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Evgeniy Sudyr wrote: > Pavel, > > 1) Are you sure that you uncommented tftpd in inetd.conf ? Is inetd started ? > 2) netstat -na | grep 69 > 3) tcpdump -ni lo port 69 > 4) check PF rules a

Re: tftp - no route to host

Pavel, 1) Are you sure that you uncommented tftpd in inetd.conf ? Is inetd started ? 2) netstat -na | grep 69 3) tcpdump -ni lo port 69 4) check PF rules as Janne wrote before (maybe you need to pass or just skip on lo). Btw, does it make any sense to use TFTP on localhost ? :) -- Thanks! Eugene

Re: tftp - no route to host

Janne Johansson PI[ET: 2011/4/29 pavel pocheptsov > openbsd 4.8 # cat /etc/pf.conf | grep tftp pass in on $int_if inet proto udp from any to $int_if port tftp # tftp 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 would not be on the $int_if, would it? -- To our sweethea

Re: tftp - no route to host

2011/4/29 pavel pocheptsov > openbsd 4.8 > # cat /etc/pf.conf | grep tftp > pass in on $int_if inet proto udp from any to $int_if port tftp > # tftp 127.0.0.1 > 127.0.0.1 would not be on the $int_if, would it? -- To our sweethearts and wives. May they never meet. -- 19th century toast

tftp - no route to host

s to '123' Apr 29 13:53:35 ipsec2 tftpd[24124]: send: No route to host Apr 29 13:53:36 ipsec2 tftpd[15240]: send: No route to host what does it mean?

Re: Debugging "no route to host" problem?

, but sometimes I get a "no route to host" error - not for all routes/interfaces, but one or two... I figured it out. I started monitoring severial system, interface und pf information and graphed them using cacti. So I was able to see a dependence between the appearance of my p

Debugging "no route to host" problem?

Hi, I run OpenBSD 4.4 GENERIC#1021 i386 on a Dell Poweredeg 2650 System as a firewall. Lan side I configured multiple carp Interfaces - without any backup system at the moment (for testing purposes). Almost all is running fine, but sometimes I get a "no route to host" error - not

Re: ftp-proxy and no route to host issue

Camiel Dobbelaar wrote: > A better test would be to try if you can "nc 21" from the > firewall. I'll try it from outside the firewall. As I tried in the past rdr/nat rules on specific interfaces will only work on incoming, not outgoing connections. > Please don't edit the information... Did y

Re: ftp-proxy and no route to host issue

On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Falk Brockerhoff wrote: > When I try to connect a ftp daemon "behind" the firewall I can see the > following entry in /var/log/messages > > /var/log/messages.2.gz:Oct 2 09:58:32 buffy ftp-proxy[21285]: #478593 > proxy cannot connect to server 195.22

Re: ftp-proxy and no route to host issue

ot connect to server 195.225.xx.yy: No route to host I can try this several times, same result. In the meantime I'm able to ping the target host on the cli of the firewall. > I'd guess that pf is blocking the control (port 21) connection for some > reason. Do you have limits on states

Re: ftp-proxy and no route to host issue

On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Falk Brockerhoff wrote: > I'm using pf and ftp-proxy on an OpenBSD 4.2 GENERIC#374 i386 box. Most > the time everything works fine, but sometimes ftp-proxy reports a "no > route to host" in /var/log/messages. I can reproduce this behaviour, but > I&#x

ftp-proxy and no route to host issue

Hello, I'm using pf and ftp-proxy on an OpenBSD 4.2 GENERIC#374 i386 box. Most the time everything works fine, but sometimes ftp-proxy reports a "no route to host" in /var/log/messages. I can reproduce this behaviour, but I'm able to ping the target ftp host on the cli at the

Re: ping: sendto: No route to host

OK... I know I did not give enough information to allow people help. So here are some more. The firewall works fine running routed most of the time. It is running 4.1-STABLE (below is a dmesg). I see a lot of interrupts on both internal and external interfaces sk0 and sk1. Something like 3600. T

ping: sendto: No route to host

Hi, Other than a hardware problem (interface, switch, cabling, etc.), What could cause such an error? I have an OpenBSD 4.1 station configured as a firewall/router, in which the internal interface has address 200.232.120.1/24 and the external interface has address 200.232.140.3/24. Even when I t

Re: Routing errors in dual pf/carp firewall setup (no route to host)

tioned a new chunk of the class C for the internal IPs of the firewalls, 5.6.7.248/29. I set all of this up, created a pair of 3 port vlans (one for each carp interface) and powered it up. Everything seems to work, except for I get routing errors - ie, no route to host. I can't even seem to ping

Re: Routing errors in dual pf/carp firewall setup (no route to host)

Can you send the output of netstat -rn? Maybe that'll help myself and others a little more. -Chad

Routing errors in dual pf/carp firewall setup (no route to host)

to work, except for I get routing errors - ie, no route to host. I can't even seem to ping across the 10.10.10.0/24 network (which is just a simple crossover cable between the firewalls). Here is the output of all relevant configuration files. I am unsure about what the contents of "my

Re: Spurious "No route to host" indications on multiple releases - found

Many thanks to all of you who responded. Based on debugging suggestions I received, it appears that the problem I'm seeing is a port reuse issue and has been thoroughly discussed by this thread: http://www.benzedrine.cx/pf/msg07469.html I'll be implementing the suggestions made in this thread a

Re: Spurious "No route to host" indications on multiple releases?

In my case (with http_load), "state-mismatch" increments each time I get a "No route to host" error. One factor which I forgot in that 'pf' thread is that TIME_WAIT state is only on the host initiating the close. If the remote host asked for the socket to be closed,

Re: Spurious "No route to host" indications on multiple releases?

ubt that would qualify as high-rate (compared to > what some other mail sites get). Our other OpenBSD systems that got > the "No route to host" messages were not processing high-rate > connections (< 10 connections per minute) but did run pf with keep state. "No route to hos

Re: Spurious "No route to host" indications on multiple releases?

other mail sites get). Our other OpenBSD systems that got > the "No route to host" messages were not processing high-rate > connections (< 10 connections per minute) but did run pf with keep state. "No route to host" when there is a route entry is generally indicating pa