IP aliasing is assigning more than one IP address per physical ethernet(MAC address) card. It looks like eth2, eth2:0, eth2:1, etc.
Full NAT is done with iptables. For DNS you can point the records to your telus IP(s) if someone else is hosting your DNS servers, or run your own with BIND and update the domain registration. Your Telus hostname is unimportant, and you only really need to worry about the ptr for the IP address that your MX record will point to. My advice is to learn the iproute2 utilities as well, policy routing is very cool. This whole Cadvision to Telus conversion has been a nightmare. I've been trying to shuffle connections and consolidate as many services and IPSec tunnels on single IPs as possible. Luckily a number of machines have dual, quad-port d-links(tulip), so with 8 ports I've had a little bit of room. Perhaps throwing some of those cards in might be a interim solution for you timmy? Try to get the older ones, I've heard there is a new manufacturer and driver for the new D-Link quads which have problems. This link about faking mac addresses looks interesting, although if it works, its not something you can just implement tomorrow: http://216.239.35.100/search?q=cache:t2Y2LdovNJgC:www.math.leidenuniv.nl/pipermail/bridge/2002-June/002021.html+fake+mac+address+dhcp&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 If I have any say in the matter, Telus will be "going away" from the various clients I work with once a migration can be planned. Regards, Wade. On Thu, 2002-08-15 at 01:51, Richard Jenniss wrote: > I'm not quite sure what you mean by IP aliasing, I assume its IP masquerading, or >NAT, or RFC 1631 > ( http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1631.txt ) > > I'm using Telus DSL and I have just setup a Linux machine to route packets on my >192.168 network using the one Telus IP and registered MAC (soon to switch to 10.0.0.x >cause I want to be lazy heh.) I will be setting DHCP on that machine, as well as DNS >and BIND (binding my domain to my Telus hostname, if possible?). Another aspect I >wish to figure out by sometime next week-ending, is port forwarding to forward >various services on my private network outwards, and a few security tools that I have >been redomended: grsecurity, port sentry and a few others if I dig through my notes. > > I'm not sure if any of what I'm doing could help you, if so, I'd love to help. > Best regards, > Richard. > > > > > On Sun, 11 Aug 2002 13:51:20 -0600 > "timmy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Anyone here have any experience with IP aliasing? I had a couple of clients on >cadvision, and I had built firewalls for thier DMZ. I ran > > IPTABLES and had configured the boxes with IP aliasing, so all of the IPs in the >/29 Cadvision provided were on the external interface of the > > firewall. I just did simple NAT/PAT to manage the services on the servers behind >the firewall. Now, with Telus, this, to the best of my > > knowledge, is no longer possible. You have to register a unique MAC for each IP >address you are using. Seeing as how all of the IP's would > > return the same MAC, this is not possible on Telus's system. Does anyone have a >solution for this, or do I have to: a) run the servers with > > no firewall, or b) build a seperate firewall for each machine?. Maybe there are >other oprions, but I'm not sure of what they might be. I did > > phone Telus tech support, and they of course were no help; they basically told me >to either go find another provider, or switch to > > their $1500/mo fibre service. > > > > What I don't understand is how they expect customers to run a network properly in >this kind of situation. If someone is running a Cisco PIX, > > or a Watchdog Firewall, which can both be configured with "IP Pools" on the >external interface, what happens to their configurations? I > > basically had to reconfigure the whole network in order to get things to work >properly with the new Telus service, not to mention the > > barrage of other problems that arised from a bunch of dumb mistakes on their end. >When I phoned and asked for support, I was pretty much > > led to beleive they did not care one way or another if my service was working. Has >it come down to that with Telus? It seems that they > > have gotten so big, with so many customers, they just don't care about a few >people that might be more than a little upset over the whole > > ordeal, so they'd just as soon lose them as customers. What's it to them after >all? They've got hundreds of thousands of customers, what's > > the big deal about losing a few? That is not good business. I work for an ISP here >in town, TeraGo Networks, and we've currently got about > > 600 customers nationwide. That's mouse nuts compared to what Telus or Shaw has, >but at least I take pride in knowing I care about our > > customer base, no matter how small or how large the company ends up getting. > > > >
