0

I'm having a strange issue with a new Ubuntu server VM install in ESXi. With DHCP enabled in /etc/network/interfaces all network connectivity works fine. However, when i use a static route with the following parameters the routing table is wrong at startup:

auto lo
iface lo inet loopback

auto ens192
iface ens192 inet static
address 192.168.70.21/24
gateway 192.168.168.70.1
dns-nameservers 192.168.70.1

With the above in place, the machine can still reach all machines on the 192.168.70.0/24 network but not any other local network (there are many). A ping to any other local network would immediately return connect: Network is unreachable.

When i run route -n I get the following which is wrong:

Kernel IP routing table
Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
192.168.70.1    0.0.0.0      255.255.255.0           U    0   0        0  ens192 

It should be this:

Kernel IP routing table
Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
0.0.0.0         192.168.70.1   0.0.0.0              UG    0   0        0  ens192
192.168.70.1    0.0.0.0      255.255.255.0           U    0   0        0  ens192 

Even my /etc/resolve.conf isn't getting the nameserver (it has none). So to temporarily get around the problem, I added a route:

ip route add default via 192.168.70.1

Now the machine can access all other local networks allowed in pfsense (192.168.15.0/24, 192.168.38.0/24, etc), and they can reach it. But even with this work around i have to add google nameservers to reach the web.

I have another Ubuntu Server VM in ESXi on the same network and it works fine with just the /etc/network/interfaces parameters above (with different static IP). So I'm not sure what is going on with this fresh Ubuntu16.04 LTS server install.

I realize i can add a permanent route but that seems like a hack in this case because that wasn't required in the other Ubuntu VM with a static route. How do i correct this properly?

2
  • AFAIK 192.168.70.21/24 isn't a valid IPv4 address (it's a CIDR address range), and 192.168.168.70.1 isn't a valid gateway address either. Nov 6, 2017 at 15:43
  • Thanks @steeldriver, The error was in the 192.168.168.70.1 typo. After fixing that, everything is working correctly. As far as 192.168.70.21/24 not being a valid address, it is an alternative way to specify both the address and the netmask on a single line. It is also outlined in man interfaces as a way to set static ip.
    – jtlindsey
    Nov 6, 2017 at 15:49

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .