[pfSense-discussion] filling network with meaningful traffic

2010-03-11 Thread Eugen Leitl
I've just got a bit of an ultimatum from my hoster, as my newly assigned networks don't have traffic yet, and I would have to give them back unless the situation changes asap. I wouldn't have issues to make all the addresse pingable and produce some light bogus traffic, but there should a way to

RE: [pfSense-discussion] filling network with meaningful traffic

2010-03-11 Thread Greg Hennessy
tor natted behind an address pool should do the trick. Greg From: Eugen Leitl [eu...@leitl.org] Sent: 11 March 2010 16:17 To: discussion@pfsense.com Subject: [pfSense-discussion] filling network with meaningful traffic I've just got a bit of an

Re: [pfSense-discussion] filling network with meaningful traffic

2010-03-11 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 04:20:32PM +, Greg Hennessy wrote: tor natted behind an address pool should do the trick. Hmm, Tor typically binds to one address though. How can I make it spread traffic across a network? I could 1:1 NAT a /24 to an internal /24 network, check. But I still would

Re: [pfSense-discussion] filling network with meaningful traffic

2010-03-11 Thread Tim Dressel
You could throw up a bunch of virtual ftp sites and leave them wide open (bind multiple IP's or virtual IP's all pointing to one volume). Put a post on usenet and watch the traffic flow in. Suddenly you are a 0-day hoster, ha! Be prepared to be t...@gged though. I wish I had a problem with

Re: [pfSense-discussion] filling network with meaningful traffic

2010-03-11 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 08:38:08AM -0800, Tim Dressel wrote: You could throw up a bunch of virtual ftp sites and leave them wide open (bind multiple IP's or virtual IP's all pointing to one volume). Put a post on usenet and watch the traffic flow in. Suddenly you are a 0-day hoster, ha! Be