Nemeth Gyorgy a écrit :
Yes, it can work as a short go-nogo test. But the suggestion was not
mentioned it, that it is only for that. And it is very likely that when
the OP tries this and it 'works' (I mean the Windows machine behind the
Linux works well), then the rules will remain.
I wrote
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Joe j...@jretrading.com wrote:
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 16:07:01 -0400
Tom H tomh0...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Nemeth Gyorgy fri...@freemail.hu
wrote:
2014-08-10 11:33 keltezéssel, Pascal Hambourg írta:
sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_forward=1
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 04:53:51 -0400
Tom H tomh0...@gmail.com wrote:
And you've proven my point...
Agreed, I just can't see why there is any controversy.
--
Joe
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:19 AM, Joe j...@jretrading.com wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 04:53:51 -0400
Tom H tomh0...@gmail.com wrote:
And you've proven my point...
Agreed, I just can't see why there is any controversy.
You misunderstand. The fact that you can't accept that there may be
others
2014-08-10 22:30 keltezéssel, Joe írta:
Why is it unresolvable? A DROP/REJECT policy is fail-safe, ACCEPT
isn't. If the rest of the rules are correct, (and more importantly,
guaranteed always to stay that way in the face of editing, sometimes
rushed) an ACCEPT policy is redundant, and if
I adopted Mr. Gyorgy's suggested iptables rules with only a
couple of additions based on nmap's report that port 411 was open
because it passed with flying colors nmaps tcp and udp scan of the
first 1056 ports, grc.com tests and pcflank.com tests.
For a single user system running no
On 10/08/2014 10:06 AM, Mike McClain wrote:
Please describe your network topology. Where's the Win2k box ?
__
| Debian| LAN| Windows 2000 |
Inet|Linux
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 17:44:52 +1000
Andrew McGlashan andrew.mcglas...@affinityvision.com.au wrote:
I give another vote for IPCop btw that or pfsense, but IPCop is
simpler.
Yes, but it's a distribution in itself, which means you need to
dedicate an entire computer to it. (No, I don't
Mike McClain a écrit :
Clearly DNS lookup is working and I have a problem with the
configuration of IE.
Check in its network settings whether a proxy is defined, and remove it.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 02:06:28PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Mike McClain a ?crit :
Clearly DNS lookup is working and I have a problem with the
configuration of IE.
Check in its network settings whether a proxy is defined, and remove it.
Hi Pascal,
Nope, no proxy.
Though
Bob Proulx a écrit :
Mike McClain wrote:
__
| Debian| LAN| Windows 2000 |
Inet|Linux|-| S40 |
(ppp) | 192.168.1.2 |
Mike McClain a écrit :
On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 09:13:23PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Same as Nemeth Gyorgy : restart without any filtering, just the IP
forwarding and masquerading. If it does not work, it's not due to
filtering. Then when everything works add the filtering.
All
Mike McClain a écrit :
from a zsh prompt:
Mike zsh:~ nslookup
Default Server: resolver1.opendns.com
Address: 208.67.222.222
Didn't return.
Of course not. If you don't provide a domain name to query in the
command line, nslookup just sits there and waits for a command or a name
to query.
On Sat, Aug 09, 2014 at 10:30:53PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
Mike McClain wrote:
Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Please describe your network topology. Where's the Win2k box ?
__
| Debian| LAN
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 11:33:27AM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Nemeth Gyorgy's ruleset is too complicated. Use the bare minimum :
sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_forward=1
iptables -t nat -P ACCEPT
iptables -t filter -P ACCEPT
iptables -t mangle -P ACCEPT
iptables -t nat -F
iptables -t filter -F
2014-08-10 01:49 keltezéssel, Mike McClain írta:
It's a rather complicated, sometimes overcomplicated script. But some
rules are missing and/or not in the correct order.
I've little doubt you are correct, admittedly I'm flailing a bit.
Trying this and that with little luck.
I'd appreciate
2014-08-10 11:33 keltezéssel, Pascal Hambourg írta:
Nemeth Gyorgy's ruleset is too complicated. Use the bare minimum :
sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_forward=1
iptables -t nat -P ACCEPT
iptables -t filter -P ACCEPT
This is really a big sechole.
iptables -t mangle -P ACCEPT
iptables -t nat -F
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Nemeth Gyorgy fri...@freemail.hu wrote:
2014-08-10 11:33 keltezéssel, Pascal Hambourg írta:
Nemeth Gyorgy's ruleset is too complicated. Use the bare minimum :
sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_forward=1
iptables -t nat -P ACCEPT
iptables -t filter -P ACCEPT
This is
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 16:07:01 -0400
Tom H tomh0...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Nemeth Gyorgy fri...@freemail.hu
wrote:
2014-08-10 11:33 keltezéssel, Pascal Hambourg írta:
Nemeth Gyorgy's ruleset is too complicated. Use the bare minimum :
sysctl -w
On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 07:05:28PM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
On 08/08/2014 12:04 AM, Mike McClain wrote:
I've been trying to get my hand rolled iptables firewall to
masquerade traffic on the LAN to/from a Win2K box.
I used to write my own firewall/ router rules, but then discovered
On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 09:16:05PM -0700, Matt Ventura wrote:
On 8/8/2014 12:04 AM, Mike McClain wrote:
I've been trying to get my hand rolled iptables firewall to
masquerade traffic on the LAN to/from a Win2K box. I've gotten it to
the point that I can ping from the boxes both ways,
On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 08:24:11PM +0200, Nemeth Gyorgy wrote:
2014-08-08 09:04 keltez?ssel, Mike McClain ?rta:
I've been trying to get my hand rolled iptables firewall to
masquerade traffic on the LAN to/from a Win2K box. I've gotten it to
the point that I can ping from the boxes both
at a loss.
Suggestions?
Same as Nemeth Gyorgy : restart without any filtering, just the IP
forwarding and masquerading. If it does not work, it's not due to
filtering. Then when everything works add the filtering.
All suggestions appreciated.
Thanks,
Mike
--
Imagination is looking
Mike McClain wrote:
Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Please describe your network topology. Where's the Win2k box ?
__
| Debian| LAN| Windows 2000 |
Inet|Linux
I've been trying to get my hand rolled iptables firewall to
masquerade traffic on the LAN to/from a Win2K box. I've gotten it to
the point that I can ping from the boxes both ways, smbclient can move
files both ways and the Win2K box can ping Google's IP address but DNS
lookup fails even
2014-08-08 09:04 keltezéssel, Mike McClain írta:
I've been trying to get my hand rolled iptables firewall to
masquerade traffic on the LAN to/from a Win2K box. I've gotten it to
the point that I can ping from the boxes both ways, smbclient can move
files both ways and the Win2K box can
or DNS error.
I've read every HOWTO and the iptables man pages several times but
am at a loss.
Suggestions?
Same as Nemeth Gyorgy : restart without any filtering, just the IP
forwarding and masquerading. If it does not work, it's not due to
filtering. Then when everything works add
On 08/08/2014 12:04 AM, Mike McClain wrote:
I've been trying to get my hand rolled iptables firewall to
masquerade traffic on the LAN to/from a Win2K box.
I used to write my own firewall/ router rules, but then discovered
purpose-built firewall/ router FOSS distributions. I used IPCop
On 8/8/2014 12:04 AM, Mike McClain wrote:
I've been trying to get my hand rolled iptables firewall to
masquerade traffic on the LAN to/from a Win2K box. I've gotten it to
the point that I can ping from the boxes both ways, smbclient can move
files both ways and the Win2K box can ping
Hello,
Joe a écrit :
Entirely unrelated to anything else in the thread, but this one caught
me yesterday, moving a firewall script from an old Ubuntu to a Sid
machine.
In Sid, 'state' no longer works. Instead of:
Are you sure it is not just a warning ? I can see from
packages.debian.org
Looks fine, except for the useless route to 192.168.2.0/32.
I searched and found some instructions with iptables commands that
would allow ip forwarding over the VPN, but it didn't seem to make
any difference:
The effect of each single iptables rule may vary depending on the global
ruleset. Hence
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 14:30:54 +0100
Pascal Hambourg pas...@plouf.fr.eu.org wrote:
Hello,
Joe a écrit :
Entirely unrelated to anything else in the thread, but this one
caught me yesterday, moving a firewall script from an old Ubuntu to
a Sid machine.
In Sid, 'state' no longer
traffic from your local LAN to the outside
$IPTABLES -A FORWARD -i eth0 -j ACCEPT
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Bonno Bloksma [mailto:b.blok...@tio.nl]
Verzonden: donderdag 17 januari 2013 8:51
Aan: debian-user
Onderwerp: RE: OpenVPN and IP Forwarding
Hi,
http://i1309.photobucket.com/albums
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 08:01:06 +
Bonno Bloksma b.blok...@tio.nl wrote:
KEEPSTATE= -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED
# Accept return traffic.
$IPTABLES -A FORWARD -j ACCEPT $KEEPSTATE
$IPTABLES -A INPUT -j ACCEPT $KEEPSTATE
Entirely unrelated to anything else in the thread, but this
I used dia to make a png file diagram of my network. I tried to make one with
text, but
I couldn't understand it and I made it. I assume the list won't forward
attachments, so
I posted it at:
http://i1309.photobucket.com/albums/s629/CletusJenkins/network_zps9f815828.png
This helped a
Hi,
http://i1309.photobucket.com/albums/s629/CletusJenkins/network_zps9f815828.png
This helped a lot.
Now me, I have the VPN server running on the router machine and the client
on the side of the end users. But if you are the only user then this should
work too, it is just a bit confusing
that would allow
ip forwarding over the VPN, but it didn't seem to make any difference:
iptables -A FORWARD -s 192.168.2.0/8 -o eth1 -j ACCEPT
iptables -A FORWARD -s 192.168.2.0/8 -o eth1 -j ACCEPT
iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.2.0/8 -o eth1 -j MASQUERADE
eth0 is the private network
to tell the clients where to send traffic.
I searched and found some instructions with iptables commands that would
allow ip forwarding over the VPN,
but it didn't seem to make any difference:
iptables -A FORWARD -s 192.168.2.0/8 -o eth1 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -s
192.168.2.0/8 -o eth1 -j
255.255.255.0 in your cfg
file on the server to tell the clients where to send traffic.
I searched and found some instructions with iptables commands that would
allow ip forwarding over the VPN,
but it didn't seem to make any difference:
iptables -A FORWARD -s 192.168.2.0/8 -o
for each client such as for client foo I have a file:
ccd/foo
ifconfig-push 10.0.0.2 10.0.0.1
I searched and found some instructions with iptables commands that
would allow ip forwarding over the VPN,
but it didn't seem to make any difference:
iptables -A FORWARD -s 192.168.2.0/8 -o eth1
on the private network could
reach the internet via my router. I am hoping for the same ip
forwarding to work as before (without any configuration on those
private machines) I just want their traffic to be forwarded through
the VPN by my router. I thought if I just configured the VPN
properly
systems). In my mind
(...heh...)
traffic that comes in via ip forwarding should go out the default gateway
whether
that is a DSL connection or a VPN running over that DSL link. I have to think
the
loss of connectivity from my router back to the private network is the crux
of the
problem or at least
Hi,
This is a good clarification. But still confusing. I think you need to
give us a block diagram or picture of things. Because in the above it
reads like you have two machines in your path where most of us would
have only one. Because you say that you vpn to a server and that server
you
Hi
I am a bit confused, I have a bridged interface with 2 active interfaces
eth0 and eth1. and ip forwarding off
I have turned off ip forwarding. I though brctl created a ethernet
bridge - same broadcast domain between the interface. but I noticed a
lot of firewall blocks in my iptables
explained what you are trying to do.
James
-Original Message-
From: Alex Samad [mailto:a...@samad.com.au]
Sent: February 18, 2010 4:07 PM
To: Debian Users
Subject: bridge + ip-forwarding
Hi
I am a bit confused, I have a bridged interface with 2 active interfaces
eth0 and eth1. and ip
-t mangle -L
Route
cat /etc/network/interface
Also, it might help if you explained what you are trying to do.
James
-Original Message-
From: Alex Samad [mailto:a...@samad.com.au]
Sent: February 18, 2010 4:07 PM
To: Debian Users
Subject: bridge + ip-forwarding
Hi
I
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 08:06:43AM +1100, Alex Samad wrote:
Hi
I am a bit confused, I have a bridged interface with 2 active interfaces
eth0 and eth1. and ip forwarding off
I have turned off ip forwarding. I though brctl created a ethernet
bridge - same broadcast domain between
I have a simple home router setup. The router runs Debian Lenny; the
client runs Ubuntu. The router has two NICs; one connects to the ISP,
the other to an internal switch.
The router box has no network issues with the Internet. I can ping, surf
websites, etc..
The client box has no problems
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:15:53 +1000, Alex Samad wrote:
have a look at /etc/ppp/ip-up.d/
Thanks. I linked my port-forwarding start script to /etc/sbin/ipmasq.
It should stay up now if 00ipmasq actually gets executed when ppp0 comes up.
-- hendrik
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 01:28:19AM +, Hendrik Boom wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 10:03:09 -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 11:11:55AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have my network front end running Debian sarge (yet, it's time to
upgrade at lest to etch).
On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 10:03:09 -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 11:11:55AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have my network front end running Debian sarge (yet, it's time to
upgrade at lest to etch). It's connected to the rest of the net by a
DSL line. I've set
I have my network front end running Debian sarge (yet, it's time to
upgrade at lest to etch). It's connected to the rest of the net by a
DSL line. I've set up port-forwarding to selected machines on my LAN
for the convenience of certain games, and bittorrent, and I'd like to
use it for some
On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 11:11:55AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have my network front end running Debian sarge (yet, it's time to
upgrade at lest to etch). It's connected to the rest of the net by a
DSL line. I've set up port-forwarding to selected machines on my LAN
for the
I'm trying to set up a firewall/gateway, and I can't seem to get
ip forwarding to work. I'm using linux kernel 2.6.23 with iptables
enabled. Here's what happens.
The firewall machine has two interfaces (both on private networks, for
testing purposes):
IFIPNetmask
eth0
On Sat, Mar 08, 2008 at 03:37:54PM -0500, David Zelinsky wrote:
I'm trying to set up a firewall/gateway, and I can't seem to get
ip forwarding to work. I'm using linux kernel 2.6.23 with iptables
enabled. Here's what happens.
The firewall machine has two interfaces (both on private
David Zelinsky wrote:
With this setup, I expect to be able to ping 10.0.0.2 from 192.168.0.2
(and vice versa), with packets routed through the firewall, but it
doesn't work.
What am I overlooking?
It looks like that 10.0.0.2 does not have a route to 192.168.0.0/24 or
that 192.168.0.2 does not
PROTECTED] writes:
I'm trying to set up a firewall/gateway, and I can't seem to get
ip forwarding to work. I'm using linux kernel 2.6.23 with iptables
enabled. Here's what happens.
The firewall machine has two interfaces (both on private networks, for
testing purposes):
IFIP
Doug others,
dat DNS and IP forwarding are two separate issues.
OK; with ipmasq installed, a Debian client
communicates through the router system just as if
directly connected. One more small problem
solved. Thanks.
dat You need to enable IP forwarding as well
as: see /etc/sysctl.conf
On Sun, Feb 18, 2007 at 02:44:50PM -0700, Archive wrote:
As mentioned in an earlier email the DOMU or secondary Xen system(s) can
not only talk to the DOM0 or Xen primary system but also to other other
DOMU or secondary Xen system(s) and that most likely involves not only
LAN interaction
On Sun, Feb 18, 2007 at 02:44:50PM -0700, Archive wrote:
It would be nice to have some examples of this route management code
with an explanation of it's operation and theory for both simple and
complex scenarios, especially some Xen scenarios.
Any takers on this??
As mentioned in an earlier email the DOMU or secondary Xen system(s) can
not only talk to the DOM0 or Xen primary system but also to other other
DOMU or secondary Xen system(s) and that most likely involves not only
LAN interaction but also Internet interaction.
Where internet interaction is
Hi, thanks everyone, I had forgotten about the route back so I set the default
gateway.
andrew.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: RE: ip forwarding Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 15:52:59 -0800 Hi
everyone, I am having some problems either
enabled IP forwarding in
/etc/network/options
Unfortunately XP1 still can not ping XP2.
(XP1 can ping Debian/Server, and Debian/Server can ping XP2)
Do I have to do anything else to enable the Debian/Server to act as a simple
router?
Thanks all.
Andrew.
= 172.16.0.10
I want XP1 to be able to ping XP2, so I enabled IP forwarding in
/etc/network/options
Unfortunately XP1 still can not ping XP2.
(XP1 can ping Debian/Server, and Debian/Server can ping XP2)
Do I have to do anything else to enable the Debian/Server to act as a
simple router
Andrew Critchlow wrote:
Do I have to do anything else to enable the Debian/Server to act as a
simple router?
Does either XP1 or XP2 know that they can find the other subnet by
sending packets to the Debian machine? i.e. is the Debian machine set as
the default gateway?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
, so I enabled IP forwarding in
/etc/network/options
Unfortunately XP1 still can not ping XP2.
(XP1 can ping Debian/Server, and Debian/Server can ping XP2)
Do I have to do anything else to enable the Debian/Server to act as a
simple router?
On XP1, set the default gateway to 10.251.134.10
machine.)
192.168.2 (eth0) is a network with Windows machines. Packets to and
from that network are no longer being forwarded. The routing table
appears to be correct and IP forwarding is turned on.
Machines on 192.168.2.* are able to ping 192.168.1.18 (the other network
card
. Packets to and
from that network are no longer being forwarded. The routing table
appears to be correct and IP forwarding is turned on.
Machines on 192.168.2.* are able to ping 192.168.1.18 (the other network
card on the routing machine) but they cannot ping any other machine on
the 192.168.1
machine.)
192.168.2 (eth0) is a network with Windows machines. Packets to and
from that network are no longer being forwarded. The routing table
appears to be correct and IP forwarding is turned on.
how are you turning forwarding on?
what does:
# sysctl -a | grep forward
list?
ie
and filtering is not
required. (There is a separate firewall machine.)
192.168.2 (eth0) is a network with Windows machines. Packets to and
from that network are no longer being forwarded. The routing table
appears to be correct and IP forwarding is turned on.
how are you turning
to be correct and IP forwarding is turned on.
how are you turning forwarding on?
$ cat /etc/network/options
ip_forward=yes
spoofprotect=yes
syncookies=no
i guess that method is deprecated: see bug #338235
but that is splitting hairs, it obviously is setting your sysctl
options.
well, take
yerine belirleyeceğiniz başka bir
porttan çalışmasını sağlayabilirseniz, yani modem buna izin veriyorsa,
uygulamayı 80 harici bir portta çalıştırıp, 80. portu da kendi makinenize
yönlendirebilirsiniz.
On Sunday 08 January 2006 22:44, Selim YASAR wrote:
ii geceler
datron adsl modemimde ip
Merhaba,
forward ve nat islemi icin bir script yazmistim. Dilerseniz inceleyin.
Kendinize gore de duzenleyebilirsiniz.
http://www.linuxgazette.com/node/10772
- Original Message -
From: Murat Demirten [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-user-turkish@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: ip forwarding
yönlendirilmesine izin veriyor.
Tabii bu durumda modemin web yönetim arayüzüne dışardan ulaşılamaz,
ama bu içerden ulaşmaya engel değil. Dışardan erişmek istenirse
ssh ile mümkün, tabii etkinleştirilirse. Çok kullanışlı bir modem.
Datron modem, IP forwarding yapmaz. Port forwarding yapar.
Bridge
ii geceler
datron adsl modemimde ip forwarding yapılabiliyormuş...baya da kolay
bişiymiş...birkaç adımda hallettim olayı fakat. gerçek ip yada ip:80
dedigimde yine modem arayüzüne gidiyor. debianda da ayar yapmam
gerekiyormu yoksa modemdenmi kaynaklanan bir hata oluştu.
--
selim yasar
I am trying to forward all ports from one ip
address to another using iptables. can this be accomplished using a single
network adaptor? anyone know what syntax to use?
Debian GNU/Linux 3.1
iptables
1.2.9-10
Tony
On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 12:48 -0400, theal wrote:
I am trying to forward all ports from one ip address to another using
iptables. can this be accomplished using a single network adaptor?
anyone know what syntax to use?
do you mean:
a.b.c.d:e - w.x.y.z:e
a.b.c.d:f - w.x.y.z:f
or
a.b.c.d:* -
- Original Message -
From:
Matt
Zagrabelny
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 3:29
PM
Subject: Re: IP Forwarding
On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 12:48 -0400, theal wrote: I am
trying to forward all ports from one ip address to another using
Ok. You need a NAT. Example:
Old IP: 200.20.20.20
New IP: 201.21.21.21
Use the rule on machine at your office:
# iptables -t NAT -A INPUT -d 200.20.20.20 -j DNAT 201.21.21.21
It works fine with one nic.
[]s
Eriberto - www.eriberto.pro.br
HOGWASH - IPS invisível em camada 2.
]
Sent: domingo, 31 de julio de 2005 11:20
To: Debian User
Subject: Re: Firewall IP Forwarding problems
Ronald Castillo wrote:
Hello.
I'm trying to connect my pocket pc by wíreless to my VMWare Windows
2000
virtual PC. Which means, I need a completely transparent connection
between my eth1
Ronald Castillo wrote:
Hello.
I'm trying to connect my pocket pc by wíreless to my VMWare Windows 2000
virtual PC. Which means, I need a completely transparent connection
between my eth1 (wireless) and vmnet8 (vmware emulated lan) devices.
So far, I've tried using the following script:
Hello.
I'm trying to connect my pocket pc by wíreless to my VMWare Windows 2000
virtual PC. Which means, I need a completely transparent connection
between my eth1 (wireless) and vmnet8 (vmware emulated lan) devices.
So far, I've tried using the following script:
Ronald Castillo wrote:
I'm trying to connect my pocket pc by wíreless to my VMWare Windows 2000
virtual PC. Which means, I need a completely transparent connection
between my eth1 (wireless) and vmnet8 (vmware emulated lan) devices.
So far, I've tried using the following script:
[snipped
Bonjour à tous,
Comment activer l' ip forwarding autrement que d'écrire dans*
/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward?
N'ay aurait--il pas un fichier normal lu par netfilter (kernel) pour le
faire?
Merci
Bayrouni
*
--
Pensez à lire la FAQ de la liste avant de poser une question :
http
pas la passerelle par défaut
. refuser les paquets routés par la source
Je penses qu'avec cela tu es paré.
Patrice
Bayrouni a écrit :
Bonjour à tous,
Comment activer l' ip forwarding autrement que d'écrire dans*
/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward?
N'ay aurait--il pas un fichier normal lu par
le passage des paquets pas la passerelle par défaut
. refuser les paquets routés par la source
Je penses qu'avec cela tu es paré.
Patrice
Bayrouni a écrit :
Bonjour à tous,
Comment activer l' ip forwarding autrement que d'écrire dans*
/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward?
N'ay aurait--il pas un
Le Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 05:36:40PM +0200, Bayrouni écrivait :
Bonjour à tous,
Comment activer l' ip forwarding autrement que d'écrire dans*
/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward?
N'ay aurait--il pas un fichier normal lu par netfilter (kernel) pour le
faire?
Dans /etc/interfaces /options
le passage des paquets pas la passerelle par défaut
. refuser les paquets routés par la source
Je penses qu'avec cela tu es paré.
Patrice
Bayrouni a écrit :
Bonjour à tous,
Comment activer l' ip forwarding autrement que d'écrire dans*
/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward?
N'ay aurait--il pas un
Salut,
Frédéric ZULIAN a écrit :
Le Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 05:36:40PM +0200, Bayrouni écrivait :
Comment activer l'ip forwarding autrement que d'écrire dans
/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward?
N'ay aurait--il pas un fichier normal lu par netfilter (kernel) pour le
faire?
Dans /etc/interfaces
hello,
simple firewall problem:
1 external nic (eth0)
1 internal nic (eth1)
i do not need to do any snat or masquerading, i am just looking to
forward the traffic from the internal to the external.
so far:
# echo 1 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
# iptables -L -v
Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT
On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 10:05 -0500, Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
hello,
simple firewall problem:
1 external nic (eth0)
1 internal nic (eth1)
i do not need to do any snat or masquerading, i am just looking to
forward the traffic from the internal to the external.
so far:
# echo 1
las maquinas ya estan configuradas para dhcp,
voy a checar el dhcp server gracias
Javi wrote:
Si quieres no tener que configurar a mano las DNS de cada ordenador, y
ya de paso tampoco las IPs, red, etc una buena solucion es que pongas en
ese linux un servidor dhcp y que configures el
desde que instale debian estan los dns
search puebla.megared.net.mx
nameserver 10.44.0.4
nameserver 10.44.0.3
:(
Mario - Vila-real wrote:
Prueba editando el /etc/resolv.conf y añadiendo nameserver TU_DNS
Un Saludo.
hola
tengo una pequeña red de computadoras conectadas en red local, y quiero
compartir el acceso a internet a traves de una maquina con debian bf24,
lei el manual IP-Masquerade-HOWTO
http://tldp.org/HOWTO/IP-Masquerade-HOWTO
cheque que tuviera los modulos necesarios y use el script de ejemplo
R Leon escribió:
hola
tengo una pequeña red de computadoras conectadas en red local, y
quiero compartir el acceso a internet a traves de una maquina con
debian bf24, lei el manual IP-Masquerade-HOWTO
http://tldp.org/HOWTO/IP-Masquerade-HOWTO
cheque que tuviera los modulos necesarios y use el
Si quieres no tener que configurar a mano las DNS de cada ordenador, y
ya de paso tampoco las IPs, red, etc una buena solucion es que pongas en
ese linux un servidor dhcp y que configures el resto de computadoras
para configurar su red por dhcp. Mira en internet hay bastante
documentacion
Hallo Liste!
Folgende Verständnisfrage:
In der Datei /etc/network/options habe ich den Eintrag ip_forward
von no auf yes gesetzt.
Dann wollte ich den Dienst neu starten und habe folgendes eingegeben:
/etc/init.d/networking restart
Allerdings ergab ein
cat
Hallo Thilo,
Deine gewuenschte Datei ist /etc/sysctl.conf. Dort kannst Du alle gewuenschten
Einstellungen unterhalb /proc/sys eintragen:
net/ipv4/ip_forward=1
Wenn Du andere Einstellungen zu den Netzwerkdiensten setzen willst, ist das die
richtige Datei.
Hope to help you
Carsten
---
Man
Hallo!
On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 18:46, Thilo Engelbracht wrote:
In der Datei /etc/network/options habe ich den Eintrag ip_forward
von no auf yes gesetzt.
Dann wollte ich den Dienst neu starten und habe folgendes eingegeben:
/etc/init.d/networking restart
Ich habe mir das Script mal
Hallo
Sven Lauritzen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 18:46, Thilo Engelbracht wrote:
In der Datei /etc/network/options habe ich den Eintrag ip_forward
von no auf yes gesetzt.
Dann wollte ich den Dienst neu starten und habe folgendes eingegeben:
1 - 100 of 171 matches
Mail list logo
