On Mar 20, 2014, at 7:15 PM, Lupe Silva
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
We have our own dhcp servers already setup so I do not want DHCP from PF, and I
believe this is core of my issue.
You *do* want PF to provide DHCP services...but only to your registration
and possibly isolation VLAN. Let your production network's DHCP server
handle the production network, with the appropriate PF listeners as you
currently have configured. Since PF has (should have) an interface
directly on your registration VLAN, no routing is required and everything
just magically works.
If the problem is that you are not able to present the registration/isolation
VLAN to your remote sites and need to do it via routed subnets, perhaps
the best solution would be to setup a point-to-point L2 tunnel for these
VLANs using one of the Cisco tools since you have their hardware at
both ends?
i.e: route add -net 10.10.20.0/255<http://10.10.20.0/255> gw 10.1.20.1 dev
eth0.2
FWIW, the last time that I looked at the CIDR spec, /255 was not a
valid IPv4 mask...
-Arthur
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arthur Emerson III Email:
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Network Administrator InterNIC: AE81
Mount Saint Mary College MaBell: (845) 561-0800 Ext. 3109
330 Powell Ave. Fax: (845) 562-6762
Newburgh, NY 12550 SneakerNet: Aquinas Hall Room 11
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/13534_NeoTech
_______________________________________________
PacketFence-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users
