2007/12/12, Ian Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Should be 'defaultrouter', but then it's a route to an apparent local
> router, whereas your em0 appears to be your public internet connection?
Yes, it's default router, like I said I was not in my work then I wrote by
myself this lines, like I didn't touch the defaultrouter line since the
install I guess it's correct, my fault. Yes, em0 is my public connection,
but it's not connected to the external network yet, that's why my default
router is 192.168.1.80 (that is my current gateway, connected with the
external world, and who I want to be replaced by this BSD box)
Hopefully you've just mis-remembered that netmask: it's non-contiguous.
> .224 perhaps?
My fault again. I messed up /27 with .224.
I think this is at the core or your issue. Let's assume that a box on
> xl1, say 192.168.2.100, wants to talk with a box on xl2, say 10.10.0.100
> 192.168.2.100 needs either your box (192.168.2.90) as its default route,
> or it needs to have added a specific route for 10.10 via your box.
> Similarly, 10.10.0.100 needs either your box (10.10.0.50) as its default
> route, or it needs to have added a specific route for 192.168.2 via you.
> Unless both of these conditions are true, packets will not get (or get
> back) to where they're supposed to go, even if your box setup is all ok.
The The machines is 192.168.1 aren't using my BSD box like it's default
gateway it, so it may be the problem? But, like I've said, this is the
second time I try to put the things to work, the first time I've set the
192.168.1 machines to use my bsd as default gatway and didn't work also. But
I gonna change it to test again. My machines in 192.168.2 are all using
192.168.2.90 as it gateway already.
email@example.com mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"