-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Dave Ewart wrote:
>On Monday, 25.07.2005 at 16:27 +1200, Adam Bogacki wrote: > >>>>>INET_IP="192.168.0.1" >>>>>INET_IFACE="eth0" >>>>>INET_BROADCAST="192.168.0.100" >>>>> >>>>>LAN_IP="192.168.0.2" >>>>>LAN_IP_RANGE="192.168.0.0/16" >>>>>LAN_IFACE="eth1" >>> >>>Well, that looks wrong for a start. The IP addresses and ranges on your >>>INET interface and LAN interface overlap, which is Bad and Wrong. The >>>broadcast address is also spurious. >>> >>>What IP addresses and net-masks are actually allocated to eth0 and eth1? >>>Perhaps show us the output of 'ifconfig'? >> >>Output of 'ifconfig' below. >> >>Adam. > > >Adam, please reply on list, do not CC people on list messages. > >>Tux:~# ifconfig >>eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:A0:CC:D9:E2:48 >> inet addr:203.79.110.81 Bcast:203.79.110.255 >>Mask:255.255.255.0 > > >Well - there you are. Above is your eth0 IP address. You should >correct your script to include 203.79.110.81 as your eth0 address and, >as seen below, eth1 is 192.168.0.1 ... > >>[...] >> >>eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:A0:CC:D9:C7:6F >> inet addr:192.168.0.1 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 >>[...] > > >Dave. > Apologies, I've picked up bad habits from other lists. Iptables now allows me to connect to the internet and do debian things and I feel a bit more secure. Do >INET_BROADCAST="192.168.0.100" and >LAN_IP_RANGE="192.168.0.0/16" still make sense ? Thanks, Adam Bogacki, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFC5hKI18X1Fk5VORARAie5AJ9ywbDMAhZvh6BfXsJYG1LebTbAzQCcD8kf Uxw9ZGJ/QEkM+CMwCOMFSa8= =eMdl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
