://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik
Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials related to Mikrotik RouterOS
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://www.butchevans.com/pipermail/mikrotik/attachments/20100916/ff4d4846/attachment.html
/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik]
Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ [http://blog.butchevans.com/] for
tutorials related to Mikrotik RouterOS
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://www.butchevans.com/pipermail/mikrotik/attachments/20100916/e05ecee7
Tried basically that. Problem is the masquerade takes the management
address, not the public. I am guessing masquerade uses the lowest
address on the interface.
On 9/16/2010 8:44 AM, Martín @ Ibersystems wrote:
The masquerade rule
is like:
out-interface=etherX action masquerade or
Yeah, I just realized after I sent the question that should work.
On 9/16/2010 8:41 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Use action srcnat, to address that you want to use.
On Sep 16, 2010 8:22 AM, Scott Reedsr...@nwwnet.net wrote:
I have a router that I need to have masquerade traffic destined for
attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://www.butchevans.com/pipermail/mikrotik/attachments/20100916/cf37544a/attachment.html
___
Mikrotik mailing list
Mikrotik@mail.butchevans.com
http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik
Visit http
is the masquerade take...
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://www.butchevans.com/pipermail/mikrotik/attachments/20100916/cf37544a/attachment.html
___
Mikrotik mailing list
Mikrotik@mail.butchevans.com
/mailto:r...@mkap.com
On 9/16/2010 7:59 AM, Scott Reed wrote:
Tried basically that. Problem is the masquerade take...
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://www.butchevans.com/pipermail/mikrotik/attachments/20100916/cf37544a/attachment.html
On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 08:59 -0400, Scott Reed wrote:
Tried basically that. Problem is the masquerade takes the management
address, not the public. I am guessing masquerade uses the lowest
address on the interface.
It uses the first IP assigned to the outbound interface. You can't see
the
Thanks, Butch.
That makes sense, too.
On 9/16/2010 11:48 AM, Butch Evans wrote:
On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 08:59 -0400, Scott Reed wrote:
Tried basically that. Problem is the masquerade takes the management
address, not the public. I am guessing masquerade uses the lowest
address on the
Do you have a comparison of the performance difference in src-nat and
masquerade?
On 9/16/2010 11:48 AM, Butch Evans wrote:
On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 08:59 -0400, Scott Reed wrote:
Tried basically that. Problem is the masquerade takes the management
address, not the public. I am guessing
You're saying that using srcnat uses more CPU then masquerade? Is
that a Mikrotik thing or an iptables thing?
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Scott Reed sr...@nwwnet.net wrote:
Thanks, Butch.
On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 11:57 -0400, Scott Reed wrote:
Do you have a comparison of the performance difference in src-nat and
masquerade?
Only that I have at times changed from one to the other and have not
seen a change in the CPU or Memory usage graphs. I don't have any sort
of scientific
On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 11:59 -0400, Josh Luthman wrote:
You're saying that using srcnat uses more CPU then masquerade? Is
that a Mikrotik thing or an iptables thing?
I have seen very little difference in terms of cpu and masquerade.
Nothing even measurable using the graphing tools.
--
/listinfo/mikrotik
Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials related to Mikrotik
RouterOS
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://www.butchevans.com/pipermail/mikrotik/attachments/20100916/4fd93edc/attachment.html
than
20 nodes and at least 3 Back hauls to a tower.
John
Radio Communications Service
Louisiana
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://www.butchevans.com/pipermail/mikrotik/attachments/20100916/e1287bbc/attachment.html
We are nearly at capacity for the upcoming training course being offered
before the MUM in Phoenix on Sept 27-29. Visit
http://store.wispgear.net/ to register. Also, I have some passes
available to those interested in attending the MUM. Email me offlist to
get your free pass. Both the
Hi Guys
We have a very big OSPF issues which is plaguing our network
We get funny results when pinging our one client's PBX
PING 192.168.43.2 (192.168.43.2) 56(84) bytes of data.
From 192.168.57.6: icmp_seq=1 Redirect Host(New nexthop: 172.26.7.3)
64 bytes from 192.168.43.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60
17 matches
Mail list logo