SSH between computers on LAN

[Aart Koelewijn]

On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 06:43:27 -0700, Karl F. Larsen wrote:

> Aart Koelewijn wrote:
>> On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 06:10:22 -0700, Karl F. Larsen wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Nils Kassube wrote:
>>>     
>>>> Karl F. Larsen wrote:
>>>>   
>>>>   
>>>>>     I did a traceroute from this computer looking for the laptop and
>>>>>     it
>>>>> failed. But a traceroute from the laptop works to this computer.
>>>>>     
>>>>>     
>>>>>     
>>>> Are you using the correct IP address for the laptop? If you try to
>>>> ping the IP of the wireless port of the laptop while it is actually
>>>> connected by wire, you won't get a reply. Try the IP of the wired
>>>> port instead. Run the "ifconfig" command on the laptop to find out
>>>> which IP address it has on the wired port.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nils
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>     I was trying Traceroute to see if it might explain why a ping to
>>>     the
>>> laptop fails. I do ifconfig on the laptop to get it's ip.
>>>
>>>     Still do not understand how this setup fails. I have 2 routers.
>>>     The
>>> second router gets Internet from the first. Right now the DSL-router
>>> is 192.168.0.x and the Belkin Router is 192.168.1.x wired and
>>> 192.168.2.x from the WiFi port. Any computer on any port will get fine
>>> two way Internet from the DSL. But it is one way from the DSL-router
>>> to the Belkin router. A computer on the Belkin can ping a computer on
>>> the DSL-router but not the other way. It's an odd problem. I expect
>>> the Belkin router is not really a router.
>>>
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>     
>>>     
>> I don't think a computer on the first router will know where to find a
>> computer on the second router if you don't set a explicit route. It
>> will try to find it through your default route, which will point to the
>> internet and not to your second router. The Belkin will know how to
>> find a computer on your first router because its default route will be
>> set to the first router. It will have to be, otherwise it won't be able
>> to find the internet.
>>
>> An explicite route can f.i. be set by ifconfig.
>>
>> Aart
>>
>>
>>
>     Thank you for your excellent description of my problem. I have never
> tried to use ifconfig in that way. I will look at it's man page. I
> recall using routes back in early Slakware days. I think they were put
> in /etc/routes/ then. Confusing back then too.
> 
> Karl

Thinking again while walking the dog, (you should always think at least 
twice) route may be a better command, look at it's man page. Long time I 
had to use it too.

Aart