up vote 0 down vote favorite
share [g+] share [fb]

I am connected via Ethernet (10.1.1.1, interface 11) as well as via Wireless LAN (172.22.12.1, interface 12). I trying to route just a certain host (140.239.191.10 - which is whatismyipaddress.com for testing purposes) via the wlan instead of the Ethernet card (which has the higher metric).

Let me give you my routing details:

Network Destination | Netmask         | Gateway     | Interface     | Metric
0.0.0.0             | 0.0.0.0         | 10.1.1.1    | 10.1.10.149   | 10
0.0.0.0             | 0.0.0.0         | 172.22.12.1 | 172.22.12.110 | 20

Now I tried the following:

route add 140.239.191.10 mask 255.255.255.255 172.22.12.1 metric 1 if 12

and I get this addition to the route table

140.239.191.10      | 255.255.255.255 | 172.22.12.1 | 172.22.12.110 | 31

And here lies the problem I think: The route is automatically assigned a metric of 31 and hence the traffic is not routed via my wlan interface, but via the ethernet (because of the lower metric). When surfing to the IP I still see the public IP address of my ethernet adapter and not the public IP address of the WLAN adapter (which are entire different networks - local DSL and UMTS).

I do not want to give the wlan the lower metric because I generally want to use the ethernet interface for all network traffic (it is faster and I can access my internal network shares) - I only want to route a single IP via the WLAN adapter.

Any suggestions appreciated!

Dennis

link|improve this question
80% accept rate
Windows will always use the most specific route regardless of metric (exceptions apply in certain very uncommon configurations). So the route you added, which is for one specific IP address will always be used for that IP regardless of it's metric (unless there is another route equally as specific, in which case metric is the arbitrator). If your browser held a persistent connection with the web server (which most HTTPv1.1 browser do) then the initial connection would have been on the LAN NIC, and would not switch to the WLAN when you added the new route. – Chris S♦ May 30 '11 at 14:54
feedback

2 Answers

up vote 0 down vote accepted

hmm - it seems to be working now without me changing anything (I actually went to get a coffee). Maybe windows takes some time to use the new settings?

Would I have to do a ipconfig /renew or something so the settings are used immediately?

link|improve this answer
I'm going to guess that if you'd tried to reach the host before adding the route, ipconfig/flushdns would get rid of the cached failure? – Kara Marfia Jan 6 '10 at 18:03
Yep, flushdns was the correct thing to do, thanks! – moontear Jan 8 '10 at 8:32
feedback
up vote -2 down vote

Well, this is really weird but win 7 somehow manages to change the route for an unreachable host to another interface/gateway. so basically it screws with your routing table base on specific IPs without you knowing it. i find that really disturbing and inconvenient.

link|improve this answer
-1 Sorry, but if you really don't understand Windows networks at all, best not to try and interpret how it behaves. – Chris S♦ May 30 '11 at 14:51
feedback

Your Answer

 
or
required, but never shown
discard

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.