Subject line say it all??
Subject line say it all??
FreePBX Distro uses Centos - It’s no different than any other CentOS installation.
Which file do I edit???
Tools/System Admin/Network Settings?
I was trying to teach you how to find answers. As Mikael pointed out the Network Settings tool allows you to add static routes.
I informed you the system was built on CentOS. What I was hoping you would do is look at the documentation on network configuration for CentOS and have a full understanding instead of simply say routes go in /etc/sysconfig/network-settings/route-ethx where x is the interface ID.
From my perspective asking a question that is documented 1000’s a places on is an abuse of the generosity of the people that help out in the forums.
I totally agree with SkykingOH, but I could not resist, I wish I could see the red face
The reason that I asked the question is that according to the DOC’s the file I’m supposed to edit is;
/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/route-eth0 or the interface you have
This file does not seem to exist in the distro…
Do I need to create this file???
Like questions you have kind of answered in the past Skyking - you only offer half answers that dont help anyone!
Also looking at the GUI (Which Michael pointed out)
Network Settings only seems to have a place to add a virtual interface, not a static ROUTE…
If you realy are a FreePBX developer then the Red Face is on you for either,
What do you mean by static route?
Do you want to add a route that does not go out by the default route?
Or do you want a default route?
Do you use DHCP?
I am not even going to go down the road this argument and I would suggest not engaging 255. If you don’t like the work of the team (that clearly Mikael is a part of) then go find another project to that you and your company can align yourself with. Perhaps they will provide an interface that “makes sense” to you.
For people that are reading this thread I believe Alan is referring to static routes as routes that point to other gateways than the default route. They are configured in the file I mentioned, per the Red Hat/CentOS documentation and the file does indeed not exist unless you need additional routes. In that case you have to create the file and populate it correctly. I will quote the Redhat documentation below for completeness to address Alan’s concern that I don’t fully answer questions.
I will also state that it is not any of our roles to provide and “solutions” for your problems. I try and offer guidance that will lead you to a road of discovery and learning. The creates independence and problem solving skills. If you rely on volunteers to support you in system administration tasks that have nothing to do with core of FreePBX you are ultimately setting yourself up to fail and be disappointed. FreePBX is about freedom and choices, not “free support” or even “free software”.
[quote=“http://www.centos.org/docs/5/html/5.1/Deployment_Guide/s1-networkscripts-static-routes.html”] You can also use the network/netmask directives format for route-interface files. The following is a template for the network/netmask format, with instructions following afterwards:
* ADDRESS0=X.X.X.X is the network number for the static route. * NETMASK0=X.X.X.X is the netmask for the network number defined with ADDRESS0=X.X.X.X. * GATEWAY0=X.X.X.X is the default gateway, or an IP address that can be used to reach ADDRESS0=X.X.X.X
The following is a sample route-eth0 file using the network/netmask directives format. The default gateway is 192.168.0.1, interface eth0. The two static routes are for the 10.10.10.0/24 and 172.16.1.0/24 networks. However, as mentioned before, this example is not necessary as the 10.10.10.0/24 and 172.16.1.0/24 networks would use the default gateway anyway:
Subsequent static routes must be numbered sequentially, and must not skip any values. For example, ADDRESS0, ADDRESS1, ADDRESS2, and so on.
Below is an example of setting static routes to a different subnet, on a machine in the 192.168.0.0/24 subnet. The example machine has an eth0 interface in the 192.168.0.0/24 subnet, and an eth1 interface (10.10.10.1) in the 10.10.10.0/24 subnet:
DHCP should assign these settings automatically, therefore it should not be necessary to configure static routes on Red Hat Enterprise Linux servers or clients. [/quote]
The interface seems to allow me to add multiple vurtual interfaces off the current interface. This would tend to mean the the 2nd and 3rd virtual interface would need to be in a seperate subnet & therefor hard for me to undestand how you could use this to add a static route.
As Skyking pointed out, a stattic route allows me to access a remote subnet or host via a seperate gateway address other than the default one.
It was my understand that these forums were for support? The Centos documentation is not clear in regards having to “create” the “route-eth0” file. The support of this forum is for the Distro in total and not just FreePBX (I do beleive there are other groups within this forum just for supporting FreePBX)
There are MANY users of the FreePBX / trixbox type distro that are NOT good with Linux and thought this was the right place to be asking these types of questions. From my perspective SkyKing I would rather you did not answer my questions in the future as there seesm to be some type of communication problem between us…
Thanks Anyway - we got there in the end
I don’t think we have a communication problem. You are just another guy trying to make a buck. I have a general problem with integrators that don’t know what they are integrating. How can you support a Linux based system and not know the basics of Linux? I would understand if you were beating yourself up over some subtly of modprobe or driver linking.
What you will find is that once you put in the grunt work and get to a certain point in your knowledge the doors open up to more knowledge. You got to do the work to build a solid foundation.
I am going to backup because my point was actually not about you, I am getting generally frustrated in a very short period of time. If you don’t mind I am going to use your thread since you seem willing to talk about it as a platform to discuss the source of my frustration.
With all of the experience I had in the trixbox forums I was concerned that these forums would degrade once the distro was released as it would lower the bar for entry. Before, you at least had to know how to untar an RPM and follow a few simple directions to load FreePBX. Now an amazing, commercial quality distro is available for free download. It is much better than the old distro I had hacked together from all sorts of sources.
The low bar of entry has attracted a whole crowd that doesn’t have a clue. You have to pull information from each post like a forensic examination. It is difficult and the tone of many posters is demanding, or places some commercial urgency on the response.
Saying “my customer is down” or “my boss is going to fire me” sets my dander standing on end. Frankly if you sold a system you can’t support or migrated your business to software without engaging the right resources and you are coming to the forum to save your bacon you deserve a lesson.
If you have followed my posts, I am an older self made guy. I built my business on many hard learned mistakes. I was never about making money on every deal. Today I have a talented team of experts that can execute with precision (on most days). You just can’t get to that point in a week.
The commerical vendors such as Cisco have very onerous requirements for resellers to keep the unskilled and financially unqualified players out of the game. We don’t have those controls in the open source world.
The only satisfaction I have is simply sitting around and watching the only two inevitable outcomes.
1 - The person/persons dig in and actually figure out what they are doing. I have been blessed to work with some folks that actually get it. You will find them posting and telling you how we have bent over backwards to help them out.
This is the best possible outcome, it grows our project and the community.
2 - The integrator fall on their face and the folks referenced in outcome 1 help out.
It is hard to articulate in a forum post. I hope you don’t mind me standing on my soap box in your post.
In the case of the route-eth0 file if you found the settings, put them in the file, ran a ‘service network restart’ and looked at the errors if you got it wrong you would have learned a bunch about how the network init scripts work.
It also doesn’t hurt to take the magic out and look at the init scripts and see what they are doing. Even if you are not a programmer (like me) it is still a learning experience.
Most of all have fun.
I am leaning toward the not helping anymore option. If something is interesting or off process and I want to dive in then I might.
As far as newbie questions I need to steer way clear.
I have stated my opinion over and over that individuals without qualifications should not be out selling their time. I see the other side of it. Botched installs that are destroying the reputation of Asterisk and FreePBX.
Explaining how to create a file in Linux and not understanding the files are not created by default is a Linux help question. It’s so far out of scope I don’t even know what to say.
The other side of the coin is DCI’s opinion. That any bone can be a help. I remember when I was learning and even the smallest shred of information would help me learn. DCI is that last person I would expect to see supporting my style as I have been a critic of some of his ideas. Even diverse opinions I see are useful and in the end of the day I have to remind everyone that it’s not personal.
I have thought long and hard what to say in response to this stream of posts. Had a long and hard look at myself and have also had many of my colleges in the IT industry “take a look” to get their advice. Yes I am just another guy trying to make a buck out of VoIP but don’t feel that is relevant to this subject.
From the above comments I feel that it should be understood that these forums are for “help” for all levels and are manned by individuals freely giving up their time to help others.
I think to adopt the attitude to provide confusing and half answers to questions that have been posted (even if they have been posted in the past) does nothing to help people.
Mention has been made of commercial product support like Cisco etc. I can tell you that they spend most of their time repeating the same fixes for the same problems over and over again.
I guess if you are looking to work in these forums then you can only expect to get repeat questions and to “bark” at people who ask them does nothing for the wider community. I do understand your frustration SkyKing, but if you are so frustrated with the questions and you feel the questions aren’t worthy of your expertise, then maybe you should choose not to respond and allow others to answer. (Remember it is your choice to post answers)
Thank you to all the support emails I have been getting from the community over this in the last week. I can tell you guys a number of people are NOT comfortable posting in these forums because of the type of responses some of the questions have been getting and this seems to not be helpful to the opensource community.
That’s my 2c worth anyways…
Just to add my 2 cents worth…
This is a community driven support forum where no one gets paid to answer your questions. You get free advice and as such you have to take all replies with a grain of salt. If you want paid support the option is there and it’s excellent.
I for one appreciate any and all replies I get in this forum, whether the answer is critical, cryptic, detailed or vague. It’s free and usually get’s me going when I am totally stuck with a problem.