Simple Layer 3 test making me feel stupid

Post your questions about SoftEther VPN software here. Please answer questions if you can afford.
Post Reply
Railtracer
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2017 7:09 am

Simple Layer 3 test making me feel stupid

Post by Railtracer » Sat Dec 23, 2017 8:38 am

I thought I understood layer 3 routing just fine, as well as softethers implementation of it, but I must have done something wrong. Quick breakdown:

My network: 192.168.0 subnet
Coworker network: 192.168.1 subnet

Hub 1 on my windows 7 based softether hyperv virtual server is for my 192.168.0 subnet activity and it works wonderfully bridged through a hyperv virtual NIC in promiscuous mode.

Hub 2 i recently made for my coworker to cascade to from his server and his network is 192.168.1 subnet

I have created a layer 3 virtual switch with two interfaces. 192.168.0.254 for my subnets interface on hub1, 192.168.1.254 for my coworkers network on hub 2.

The cascade from his server to hub 2 is successful. On that session I can see the ip table with his 192.168.1 subnet addresses.

I have set a static route on my tp link router for 192.168.1.0 subnet with 192.168.0.254 as the next hop.

I can ping the 192.168.0.254 and 192.168.1.254 interfaces from a machine on my network, so i assumed the layer 3 virtual switch was working.

Tracert will read 1: 192.168.0.50 (my router) 2: 192.168.0.254 3: 192.168.1.254 if i run it against 192.168.1.254

If I try to ping any of the ip's of any active machines on my coworkers network they will fail. I cant seem to be able to ping anything that resides on his physical network, only the interface on my layer 3 virtual switch. I keep reading through the documentation for using softethers layer 3 routing and I seem to be following it to a T.

Does anyone see any issues with how I have configured my virtual layer 3 switch and tp link router? At this point I am thinking my coworkers local bridge on his server is where my problem lies.

Does the fact that I can ping the 192.168.1.254 interface effectively prove that I have a functioning layer 3 route to the 192.168.1.0/24 network assuming that there is one within the scope of the hubs involved with my layer 3 virtual switch? I feel like it does but perhaps I am wrong.

thisjun
Posts: 2535
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 11:03 am

Re: Simple Layer 3 test making me feel stupid

Post by thisjun » Fri Jan 05, 2018 5:47 am

Did you add route on coworker's office?

Railtracer
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2017 7:09 am

Re: Simple Layer 3 test making me feel stupid

Post by Railtracer » Mon Jan 08, 2018 8:53 pm

Thanks for the response, let me update you on what ended up happening.

Just for fun, I added a local bridge to my network on the virtual hub that I built for my coworkers cascade connection to connect to. I then manually set one of my local machines to his subnet with his router as my gateway, to prove the layer 2 connectivity, and with that I was able to ping and access his network just fine. With this access, I configured a static route to my network on his router, and tested some pings back to my own network and found that they worked just fine.

So I discovered the virtual layer 3 switch was working, but only from his network to mine. Here is where it gets stupid. I needed to replace a power outlet on the same circuit as my server, so I shut it down and did my work. When I brought it back up all the layer 3 routing was running fine, with no changes made at all. So even though I cant prove it, I feel like there might be some kind of bug with the virtual layer 3 switches when they are created that may at times require a service restart before they function

Post Reply