1

I'm migrating one of my services to a new public facing IP and I'm at a loss as to why the recently added route isn't functioning. This is a Server 2008 R2 box. I've covered several other questions - notably Windows static route not working and Static route issue on Windows Server 2008 R2 - but I also checked a bunch of other resources as well.

For the time being I'm trying to cut only traffic to my one test source IP. 

route -p add 11.11.121.110 mask 255.255.255.255 172.125.121.1 if 22 metric 1

The interface ID is good on this description. The routing table looks good as well. 

IPv4 Route Table
===========================================================================
Active Routes:
Network Destination        Netmask          Gateway       Interface  Metric
          0.0.0.0          0.0.0.0     192.168.51.1     192.168.51.5    266
   11.11.121.110  255.255.255.255    172.125.121.1   172.22.125.187     11
    100.100.100.0    255.255.255.0     192.168.51.1     192.168.51.5     11
        127.0.0.0        255.0.0.0         On-link         127.0.0.1    306
        127.0.0.1  255.255.255.255         On-link         127.0.0.1    306
  127.255.255.255  255.255.255.255         On-link         127.0.0.1    306
     172.22.125.0    255.255.255.0         On-link    172.22.125.187    266
   172.22.125.187  255.255.255.255         On-link    172.22.125.187    266
   172.22.125.255  255.255.255.255         On-link    172.22.125.187    266
     192.168.20.0    255.255.255.0     192.168.51.1     192.168.51.5     11
     192.168.51.0    255.255.255.0         On-link      192.168.51.5    266
     192.168.51.5  255.255.255.255         On-link      192.168.51.5    266
   192.168.51.255  255.255.255.255         On-link      192.168.51.5    266
    192.168.100.0    255.255.255.0     192.168.51.1     192.168.51.5     11
        224.0.0.0        240.0.0.0         On-link         127.0.0.1    306
        224.0.0.0        240.0.0.0         On-link      192.168.51.5    266
        224.0.0.0        240.0.0.0         On-link     10.42.204.244    266
        224.0.0.0        240.0.0.0         On-link    172.22.125.187    266
  255.255.255.255  255.255.255.255         On-link         127.0.0.1    306
  255.255.255.255  255.255.255.255         On-link      192.168.51.5    266
  255.255.255.255  255.255.255.255         On-link     10.42.204.244    266
  255.255.255.255  255.255.255.255         On-link    172.22.125.187    266
===========================================================================
Persistent Routes:
  Network Address          Netmask  Gateway Address  Metric
          0.0.0.0          0.0.0.0     192.168.51.1  Default
    192.168.100.0    255.255.255.0     192.168.51.1       1
    100.100.100.0    255.255.255.0     192.168.51.1       1
     192.168.20.0    255.255.255.0     192.168.51.1       1
===========================================================================

However whenever I try a traceroute I'm still going out the default route (192.168.51.1). 

tracert 11.11.121.110

Tracing route to 11.11.121.110 over a maximum of 30 hops

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.51.1

I've also tried disabling / renenabling the NIC without any impact.

What am I doing wrong?

Community
  • 1
Tim Brigham
  • 15,545
  • 10
  • 75
  • 115

2 Answers2

2

You have a route here:

Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric 11.11.121.110 255.255.255.255 172.125.121.1 172.22.125.187 11

but you have no route to that gateway 172.125.121.1 except through the Default Route.

But in your comment to longneck you say:

172.22.125.1 (gateway)

Did you mess up the syntax and mean for the gateway IP to be 172.22.125.1 instead of 172.125.121.1?

TheCleaner
  • 32,627
  • 26
  • 132
  • 191
1

It looks like you have 3 NICs with IP 10.42.204.244/32, 172.22.125.187/24 and 192.168.51.5/24. However, none of those NICs are in the same subnet as 172.125.121.1. A route defined to an IP not in a subnet directly attached to your computer won't be used.

longneck
  • 23,082
  • 4
  • 52
  • 86
  • 172.22.125.187 (server) and 172.22.125.1 (gateway) both have a /24 subnet. That would be directly attached yes? – Tim Brigham Oct 29 '14 at 18:59