Ok so I would be better suited, then, utilizing a third firewall?

I have 2 right now on our Cable service: one for basic LAN traffic and one for 
specific services behind the firewall (SMTP, FTP, etc.).

I could have this new FTTO/FTTP connection firewall actually do the specific 
services one, too, and route for the IPs? 

Here’s what their email said (yes, I did change the IPs to private to keep them 
off the net): 
> NOTE: As soon as the remainder of your service setup completed your static IP 
> address will be live with this provided info. The rest of the service setup 
> should be completed very soon. Additionally your 8-block of IP address are 
> also provisioned. They are being routed to your firewall at 10.0.12.222 
> Network: 192.168.120.16 Netmask: 255.255.255.248 You can contact tech support 
> when you are ready to change your MAC address.

As it stands right now the firewall is definitely accessible remotely. And I 
like that. It sounds like I would get 6 functional IPs out of the group (17-21 
and .222)



> On Jun 25, 2015, at 10:51 AM, Steve Yates <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Ryan Coleman wrote on Thu, Jun 25 2015 at 10:03 am:
> 
>> So I got FTTO from the local non-telco and they have a static IP for my 
>> firewall
>> separate from my assigned block and my block is definitely not in a routable
>> space with the master IP.
>> 
>> Let’s assume the configuration is something like this…
>> 
>> Firewall: 10.0.12.55/30 -(Gateway, for sake of argument, is 10.0.12.56)
>> Statics: 192.168.120.16/29 (so .17 through .21 are usable)… they say they are
>> forwarding to the firewall…
> 
>       Assuming you've used private IPs in your example and actually have 
> public IPs on both sides, what they've done is to route the entire subnet to 
> you.  pfSense's WAN would use 10.0.12.56 and computers on the LAN could use 
> the public IPs directly.  pfSense is what would do the routing between them.  
> pfSense would use, say, 192.168.120.17 for its LAN IP and that would be the 
> gateway on your computers.  So .18-.22 would be usable on your "LAN" side.
> 
> --
> 
> Steve Yates
> ITS, Inc.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pfSense mailing list
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
> Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold

_______________________________________________
pfSense mailing list
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold

Reply via email to