> >>>>> "Mike" == Mike Thomas <mike_at_bedarra.com> writes:
> >> > I am using left=198.64.133.69 as left, do you mean use eth0 as
the
> >> >interface?
> >>
> >> yes, that is what I'm saying.
> >> Specifying 133.70 as your nexthop isn't going to work because it is
> >> local. Perhaps if you specified another unused address on that
network.
>
> Mike> Oops, the nexthop that was causing the problem is 198.64.129.1.
I was
> Mike> trying 133.70 as a last gasp. So you are saying that I can't
have a default
>
> Yes, I understand.
>
> Mike> route to a different subnet than the ip I want to IPSEC
over(apologies if I
> Mike> am being thick here).
>
> What happens again if you specify 129.1 as your nexthop again?
I just posted a barf. Basically the same thing, but the route being added
uses a gw of 129.1 instead of 133.70.
Mike.
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users_at_lists.freeswan.org
http://lists.freeswan.org/mailman/listinfo/users
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Mon Jul 29 2002 - 05:20:14 CEST