This is pretty old, but I'll leave some info here for others who might run into it.
Deploying a docker container with default bridge network configuration assumes your application will need to access the same resources as the host, therefor it masquerades traffic from the container.
There are two ways to go about it:
Prevent masquerading, by setting the ...
Is there a default route (or other route covering 10.10.10.10/32) via eth0? If you're deleting first and then adding, you might have a race condition where the delete happens, packets go out the default route during the time between delete and add, then the add happens and packets start going where you expect.
It definitely sounds like some form of race ...
It seems to me that you are conflating a number of different things here. First, I doubt that the net mask on your server's ethernet port is actually /128. I suspect it's something else (/64 perhaps) and that you're on a shared segment with a bunch of other customers.
Judging by the output of your "ip -6 a" command:
4: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,...
You can try to add a DNS server with forwarders (for internet related domains) so you can add your domain (*.local) and those will respond (as long as you configure the other machines to use your VM as DNS server as well).
I have found a great article where it explains how to use DNSMasq it's not difficult and, if you see it works, perhaps move the ...
If you can, try this: Configure apache2 and host to pass traffic to a docker container with nginx
In this answer, Evhz sets up Apache on the main machine and all other applications in their containers. The containers use another port than 80. Then afterwards he sets up redirecting to that container for some URLs in the Apache config files.
You did not say how many switches or the topology, so that makes it a bit harder. First, is it possible that you have a loop in the network? Since the switches are unmanaged, spanning tree would not exist to break a loop and you can have broadcast storms. Even a device with two interfaces could cause a loop.
After that, can you ping devices on the same ...
To be exact, the gateway needs to be on the same physical network as the computer, as reaching it (or reaching any computer on the network, really) requires ARP packages to be sent. For this, any local network requires a route entry, which defines "on-link" computers. Here is what a route entry for a more common network setup would look like:
I found a solution! From the original post, I was very close and only missed one step, but I feel this step was important and I was not able to find it in any guides or tutorials. I wanted to follow up and hopefully, this is useful for someone else that could be going through the same issue.
The step I missed was to manually set a static route inside of my ...
Usually, I wouldn't recommend that kind of approach to solve, and there are a lot of reasons why: networking issues, performance issues, troubleshooting issues, and so on.
I would try solving that initially with a DNS name resolution or, if it's just a web application, a reverse proxy inside your network (if that's the case, that could also be solved using ...
This should do it. The top command works using iptables, which is relatively simple in this case as it is for all traffic between two IPs
# iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -d 192.0.2.1 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.0.2.2
In 'Microtik' format it is:
/ip firewall nat add chain=dstnat action=dst-nat src-address=192.0.2.1 dst-address=192.0.2.1 to-addresses=192.0.2.2
On my case the file "/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/route-device" didnt exist.
I proceed to add the required network or ip on the file "/etc/sysconfig/static-routes" and to make it permanently, I rebooted the machine and it turned out working as expected.
it was done in a :
CentOS Linux release 7.5.1804 (Core)
You are confusing technologies. You can't use iptables for tunnelling. Tunneling implies encapsulating a packet inside another - iptablea does not do this. What IPtables can do is manipulate and track the source and/or destination addresses of packets which may or may not do what you want - depending on protocol and exact gaming server requirements. You ...
You can configure VPC route tables for route propagation such that VPN and Direct Connect/Direct Connect Gateway prefixes from the Virtual Private Gateway (VGW) populate the routing table. If you have a background in networking, you can think of the VGW as a BGP-speaking router.
For VPCs connected using Transit Gateway (TGW), there is no route propagation ...
I recently ran into this problem (following the same article mention in the question) and after fiddling around a little, I found that the following command enable the local forwarding of the packets for the tun device.
echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/tun0/accept_local
I know its very late, I am just posting here so that anybody who faces the same ...
The problem, in this case, is this line missing in OpenVPN server configuration.
So the right routing for me is:
ip rule add from 192.168.1.117 table novpn
ip route add default via 192.168.1.1 dev eth0 table novpn
I think you didn't grasp what's the role and usage of tun/tap interfaces, and that's the cause of your problems. Let me explain.
Consider the tap0 interface as the end of a virtual wire with two sides: the visible side: tap0, and the invisible side of the wire in the application: this invisible side has to be entirely handled by the application. The ...