[SOLVED] - Networking Error - Unable To Access Services

[jmacdougca]

I am trying to access services on 24.109.185.149 externally. Gateway and ip ping locally. I have two LAN cables plugged into this hardware. Aiming to run services on one ip and another. This router is in bridge mode.

Here is my routing table.

[Neptune@orcacomputers ~]$ ip r

Code: Select all

default via 24.109.184.149 dev eno1 proto static metric 100 
default via 24.109.185.149 dev enp9s0 proto static metric 101 
24.109.184.149 dev eno1 proto static scope link metric 100 
24.109.184.150 dev eno1 proto kernel scope link src 24.109.184.150 metric 100 
24.109.185.149 dev enp9s0 proto static scope link metric 101 
24.109.185.150 dev enp9s0 proto kernel scope link src 24.109.185.150 metric 101 
192.168.101.0/24 dev virbr1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.101.1 
192.168.122.0/24 dev virbr0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.122.1 
192.168.200.0/24 dev virbr2 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.200.1 

As for connection devices I have

[Neptune@orcacomputers ~]$ ifconfig

Code: Select all

eno1: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500
        inet 24.109.184.150  netmask 255.255.255.255  broadcast 24.109.184.150
        inet6 2604:3d08:1:1b:802c:fece:22c1:a05  prefixlen 128  scopeid 0x0<global>
        inet6 fe80::9d57:fe6f:7ae6:f382  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>
        ether ac:9e:17:b4:2e:cb  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 181691159  bytes 36017389595 (33.5 GiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 22592445  bytes 4213889372 (3.9 GiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
        device interrupt 20  memory 0xfb100000-fb120000  

enp9s0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500
        inet 24.109.185.150  netmask 255.255.255.255  broadcast 24.109.185.150
        inet6 fe80::ae9e:17ff:feb4:3123  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>
        ether ac:9e:17:b4:31:23  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 153113546  bytes 9213857669 (8.5 GiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 27500  bytes 5645637 (5.3 MiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
        device memory 0xfb600000-fb61ffff  

What is confusing me is when I run software on 24.109.184.150 I see eth0 trying to connect which does not exist. So something I did has broken the networking. Just not sure what.

Code: Select all

[root@orcacomputers control]# tail -F /var/log/software/current | tai64nlocal
2022-10-18 16:01:52.127311500 MacDevice: eth0

[6]+  Stopped                 tail -F /var/log/software/current | tai64nlocal
[root@pd2nsc1 control]# ifconfig eth0
eth0: error fetching interface information: Device not found

I can't ping or access any services on 24.109.185.150.

Here are my firewall settings

[Neptune@orcacomputers ~]$ firewall-cmd --list-all

Code: Select all

public (active)
  target: default
  icmp-block-inversion: no
  interfaces: eno1 enp9s0
  sources: 
  services: cockpit dhcpv6-client http https imap imaps ipp ipp-client mdns sftp smtp ssh telnet vnc-server
  ports: 7689/tcp 25/tcp 80/tcp 443/tcp 143/tcp 993/tcp 587/tcp 6666/tcp 5900/tcp 5901/tcp 6600/tcp 5902/tcp 5802/tcp 5903/tcp 3389/tcp 5904/tcp 588/tcp 5912/tcp 5927/tcp 9970/tcp 53378/tcp 55698/tcp 20/tcp 21/tcp
  protocols: 
  masquerade: yes
  forward-ports: port=9970:proto=tcp:toport=22:toaddr=192.168.101.10
  source-ports: 
  icmp-blocks: 
  rich rules: 

I see both interfaces in the active firewalld zone. What am I missing?

[jlehtone]

when I run software I see eth0 trying to connect which does not exist.

It does sound like the software has been set to check interface "eth0".

You should preferably reconfigure the software to use existing interface.
If that is not possible, then rename the device that you want to be used.
(I'm not sure on details how to do that.)

[tunk]

A few years ago I had to rename the NIC to get some license software to work.
The info I used is now behind a login-wall, but I think this is close to what I did:
https://gist.github.com/smijar/86c17992 ... 7001e5fc88

[jmacdougca]

when I run software I see eth0 trying to connect which does not exist.

It does sound like the software has been set to check interface "eth0".

You should preferably reconfigure the software to use existing interface.
If that is not possible, then rename the device that you want to be used.
(I'm not sure on details how to do that.)

Okay I deleted the previous interfaces and set them up again and https and smtp are working on 24.109.185.149. Great.
I can ping 24.109.185.149 externally now but still unable to ssh into 24.109.185.149 or telnet into a port successfully. This sounds like a firewall issue buy I have both interfaces in the public(active) zone so not sure what's going on here. Any ideas? If I could ssh into 24.109.185.149 that would be great.
Not sure if I need to set up a bridge here or not

[jlehtone]

I don't have a clear picture of your network topology. This is what I read so far:

* You do have a machine "orcacomputers" that has two network ports:
- one has address 24.109.184.150/32 and apparently has point-to-point link to machine "A"
- other has address 24.109.185.150/32 and apparently has point-to-point link to machine "B"
* Machine "A" has address 24.109.184.149 and presumably another port in different subnet as "orcacomputers" believes "A" to be a router
* Machine "B" has address 24.109.185.149 and presumably another port in different subnet as "orcacomputers" believes "B" to be a router
* "orcacomputers" is a host for some virtual guests too

You say that you can't ssh to B, but we know practically nothing about B.

This router is in bridge mode.

That is an oxymoron. A router routes between distinct subnets. A bridge is a switch between machines in same subnet.
What you probably mean is that you have taken a consumer all-in-one device and use only its switch part. (Then it is neither A nor B.)

[jmacdougca]

Okay what I did was add the 24.109.185.150 to the same nic as 24.109.184.150 and all services working.

I am wondering if I needed to make a bridge connection?
Test for another time...

[jlehtone]

I am wondering if I needed to make a bridge connection?

Out of curiosity: what do you mean by "bridge connection"? What functionality do you expect it to add?