----- Original Message ----- From: "Rene Bartsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 10:50 PM Subject: [Bridge] Newbie having trouble to set up a bridge - please answer
> I do have the following network configuration (255.255.0.0 is netmask in > the complete network): > > 10.1.x.x - clients > | | | | | > eth0 eth1 ------- | | | | | > ------------ T-DSL------------ 100BaseTX | | | | | | | > | Internet |------| Firewall |------------| HUB |----------------------- > ------------ ------------ | | 10.1.0.0 | > dynamicIP 10.1.1.1 ------- | > | > 10.1.2.1 | eth0 > ----------- > | Server | > ----------- > 10.2.2.1 | eth1 > | > 10.2.0.0 1000BaseT | > -----------------------------------------------| > | | | | | | | | | | | > | | | | | | | | | | | > | | | | | | | | | | | > 10.2.x.x - clients > It's working quite well, but the additionally 10.2.0.0 network increases > administration (routing tables at the firewall, etc.) and causes trouble > with windows clients and their workgroups. > ping 10.1.2.1 worked, but no connection to the to networks ... Is this a ping from a 10.1.x.x client? > Did I do anythig wrong? I don't know. If the problem is pinging from 10.1.x.x to 10.2.x.x maybe the problem is in the routing table of the 10.1.x.x client. Maybe that routing table says those packets have to be sent to the gateway (the firewall I presume). And maybe the firewall's rules or routing table don't handle those packets well. > Do I need any of the kernel patches (I only want it working for now, > security and so on to be done later ...) No. > Might there be problems with the two (eth0 and eth1) 1000BaseT NICs > (Allnet 0124, NS83820 supported by kernel module)? I dunno, guess not. cheers, Bart _______________________________________________ Bridge mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.math.leidenuniv.nl/mailman/listinfo/bridge
