Find the answer to your Linux question:
Results 1 to 2 of 2
Hi everyone, I'm getting this irritating message when I try to define a route to one of my remote gateways on one of my ubuntu servers: Failed to create active ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #1
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1

    Failed to create active route : SIOCADDRT: No such process


    Hi everyone,

    I'm getting this irritating message when I try to define a route to one of my remote gateways on one of my ubuntu servers:

    Failed to create active route : SIOCADDRT: No such process

    Ok, so I understand that this can be a misleading message, that it actually has to do with the way my route is being defined. I'm using webmin to do this, by the way.

    My purpose is to tell my ubuntu 10.04 server (which is on a public IP address, part of a block of IP addresses we lease from our ISP) that if it wants to talk to the 192.168.2.0 network, it needs to go through a public IP address at the remote site (which is NOT a member of the same block of public ip addresses). The remote site gateway is a pfSense machine.

    Any thoughts as to what I might look at here?

  2. #2
    Linux Engineer Kloschüssel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    773
    If you want that two servers can communicate over the internet, something like this:

    SRV1 <--INTERNET--> SRV2

    you have at least two possible solutions available that I know of.

    1] VPN
    Connects both sites with a network tunnel that works basically alike a physical cable between both of the networks. This lets you ping SRV1 from SRV2 and vice versa using their private IPs. The downside of this setup is that setting up a VPN is not trivial. There are thousands of different VPN softwares available and finding the right one can be tiresome. To mention two of them that are among the most used vpn servers: Cisco and OpenVPN.

    2] NAT
    Makes the servers reachable on specific ports on their PUBLIC IP. If the public ips are dynamical (not static), this setup can suffer from downtimes, even if you use a dynamic dns service. The pro of this setup is that setting up a NAT on the modems/routers you use is fairly easy, but you cannot access the servers by their private IPs and every open port can be assigned only once - which means that you cannot have two servers on one private network that should be reachable by one public port only.

    Cheers

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •