> > Yes, the PM had the proper netmask table entry, and my gateway Cisco
> > had a static route for the /24 pointing at the PM. All the /27s out of
> > that /24 were connected to that same PM, so I didn't bother updating
> > the netmask table on other PMs. In the above case, .65 was reachable,
> > and the Cisco directed packets for .66 towards the PM as expected, but
> > the PM threw them right back at the Cisco.
>
> You should have static routes in the Cisco for the /27's pointing to the
> PM, not trying to do it as a /24.
I tried various combinations of that (including no routes on the Cisco
at all), but .66 was still not pingable from the PM itself. And traces
from the PM showed him sending everything to the Cisco, even though the
PM's route table had "x.y.z.64 x.y.z.65 HS 1 ptp26" in it.
-- John W. Temples, III || Providing the first public access Internet Gulfnet Kuwait || site in the Arabian Gulf region