Ignore what other folks are saying about NATting - if you don't want
to do it that way, then don't. I don't think there's any need to. My
ISP gives me a static /28 subnet of 8 IP addreses (5 usable) wiht my
ADSL connection - if I genuinely want to allocate one of these
properly to a machine on the LAN then NATting and port-forwarding is
only one way of doing it.
That way has disadvantages and I find it clumsy. I assume your ISP
provides you with multiple IPs? You don't mention this in the post.
I think Mike Williams has already indicated your problem, but I'm
posting again to reinforce his point.
On 13 Aug 2007, at 20:38, Mateus Interciso wrote:
10)ifconfig br0 up
11)dhclient eth1
12)ifconfig eth0 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0
10 forward:
10)ifconfig br0 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 up
11)dhclient eth1
Here you're doing stuff to eth0 and to br0. This is wrong. eth0 can
be pretty much ignored once the bridge is up, and that's why you were
correct in zeroing the addresses of the underlying NICs (`ifconfig
eth0 0.0.0.0`, `ifconfig eth1 0.0.0.0`). Once you've brought the
bridge up packets between the two interfaces will be forwarded
automatically - all your IP address allocation should be to br0 and
most everything you're doing should refer to the new br0 interface, I
think.
I have to admit that I'm pretty rusty on this stuff, but I think the
hard part is conceptualising it. You'll kick yourself when you see it.
Stroller
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
