> From: hrkesh sahu
> Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 19:09:02 +0530
> To: "Julian H. Stacey"
> Cc: Polytropon ,
> FreeBSD questions
Hi, No idea why it was To: me.
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I dislike MS & windows & quoted-prin
Hi All,
I am facing a routing issue for the Interoperability 1.5 topology.
Please find the attachment of the exact topology map.
As per test setup –
Ø Configured REF-Router2 NOT to transmit Router Advertisement on
Network1. But REF-Router2 is able to transmit Router Advertisement on
> This freebsd server in an internal lan server, IP 192.168.1.254.
> 192.168.1.212 is gateway on internet.
[...]
tap --> tun
solved :-)
Pol
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To un
Hi all :-)
This freebsd server in an internal lan server, IP 192.168.1.254.
192.168.1.212 is gateway on internet.
I've an easy config:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire
default192.168.1.212 UGS 031807em0
10.20.10.0/24
Hi,
On Mon, 8 Jul 2013 08:01:09 -0400
staticsafe wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 09:57:59AM +0100, Paul Macdonald wrote:
> >
> > On doing some updates this morning, am seeing a routing issue beyond
> > bgp1-ext.ysv.freebsd.org...
> >
> > Updating Index
> &
Paul Macdonald schreef:
On doing some updates this morning, am seeing a routing issue beyond
bgp1-ext.ysv.freebsd.org...
Updating Index
fetch: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ports/INDEX-9.bz2: No route to host
www.freebsd.org.513 IN CNAME wfe0.ysv.freebsd.org.
wfe0.ysv.freebsd.org
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 09:57:59AM +0100, Paul Macdonald wrote:
>
> On doing some updates this morning, am seeing a routing issue beyond
> bgp1-ext.ysv.freebsd.org...
>
> Updating Index
> fetch: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ports/INDEX-9.bz2: No route to host
>
> www.freebs
On doing some updates this morning, am seeing a routing issue beyond
bgp1-ext.ysv.freebsd.org...
Updating Index
fetch: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ports/INDEX-9.bz2: No route to host
www.freebsd.org.513 IN CNAME wfe0.ysv.freebsd.org.
wfe0.ysv.freebsd.org. 1690IN A
On 13/03/2013 14:59, Paul Macdonald wrote:
Hi,
I have added an IP of the 2nd group of 254 addresses in a /23.
let's call them100.100.98.0 and 100.100.99.0
what's the correct way to set up the routing table for this and how my
rc.conf should look
Current
Hi,
I have added an IP of the 2nd group of 254 addresses in a /23.
let's call them100.100.98.0 and 100.100.99.0
what's the correct way to set up the routing table for this and how my
rc.conf should look
Currently netstat shows something like the below
D
134.217.128.1
This is smth absoulutely wrong:)
Basically, if you only need a vlan interface that could be used for
routing, you need these commands only:
ifconfig vlan95 create
ifconfig vlan95 inet 134.217.128.117/24 vlan 95 vlandev fxp0
and in /etc/rc.conf you should put such strings:
clone
your task correctly, then this line is faulty from
your configuration:
>ifconfig fxp0 add 134.217.128.117 netmask 255.255.255.0
You don't need it.
>route add -inet 134.217.128.117 134.217.128.1
This is smth absoulutely wrong:)
Basically, if you only need a vlan interface that coul
I am trying set this up. First I munged the IP addresses. Not to worry if I hit
yours. I did the following commands:
ifconfig vlan0 create
ifconfig vlan0 vlan 95 vlandev fxp0
ifconfig vlan0 inet 134.217.128.117 netmask 255.255.255.0
ifconfig fxp0 add 134.217.128.117 netmask 255.255.2
Hi everyone,
I've been doing a lot of google searching recently for variants of
"freebsd source-based routing" to look for how to get a dual-homed
FreeBSD machine to send to the correct default gateway based on the
source address of the packets it's expecting that gateway to p
68.2.1 192.168.1.1
> PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) from 192.168.2.1: 56 data bytes
> ^C
> --- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics ---
> 8 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss
>
>
> netstat -nr
> Routing tables
>
> Internet:
> DestinationGateway
Thank you, Mark!
All work!
-
Вы писали 22 июня 2012 г., 16:31:39:
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 08:10:43 -0500, UNIX developer @ Google.com
> wrote:
>> now after reboot the problem still the same.
>> ping -S 192.168.2.1 192.168.1.1
>> PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) from 192.168.2.1: 56 d
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 15:59:36 -0500, UNIX developer @ Google.com
wrote:
/etc/rc.conf
ifconfig_em0=" inet 192.168.1.10 netmask 255.255.255.0"
ifconfig_em1=" inet 192.168.2.1 netmask 255.255.255.0"
defaultrouter="192.168.1.1"
gateway_enable="YES"
static_routes="clnet"
route_clnet="-net 192.168.2
Hi!
I have problem with routing on FreeBSD.
I have ESXi 5 host. In there is 5 VMs and one of them is a BSD.
I need create router on BSD.
I try to setting up it with this manual:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/network-routing.html
but problem is still the same...
I cant ping external network
On Apr 13, 2012, at 4:58 PM, Mark Felder wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:53:49 -0500, Chad Leigh Shire.Net LLC
> wrote:
>
>> No NAT needed since they share the network stack under Jails v1 they share
>> the routing tables. It works. Try it.
>
> You're clear
On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:53:49 -0500, Chad Leigh Shire.Net LLC
wrote:
No NAT needed since they share the network stack under Jails v1 they
share the routing tables. It works. Try it.
You're clearly exploiting a bug in FreeBSD 6's jails. It must get confused
and send your pu
r Jail they are assigned to)
>
> Is this correct? This seems bizarre; this should only be possible if you're
> doing NAT somewhere in there and that is not possible with Jails v1 (which
> share a network stack) and is only possible in Jails v2 (vnet).
No NAT needed since they s
Do I understand this right?
Working in FreeBSD 6.x:
interface em0: 1.2.3.4/24 <-- public IP, host only
192.168.1.1/24 <-- private IP, host only
192.168.1.2/24 <-- Jail #1
192.168.1.3/24 <-- Jail #2
With this configuration you had no problems accessing the
Hi All
OK, so I have a server that has been running FreeBSD 6.1 and a bunch of jails,
providing a few limited services. I am migrating these from real hardware and
FreeBSD 6.1 with jail running, to a Xen based VPS running FreeBSD 9.0-R with a
kernel rebuild from a GENERIC kernel to GENERIC plu
I'd try routed_enable = "YES" instead.
Regards
Éric Masson
I have now setup a virtual instance of FreeBSD and another machine
running Bind9 on OpenBSD.
I can tell that the system is receiving RIP updates as netstat -r shows
the routes advertised by my router however, it seems that RIP
On 01/30/2012 07:11 PM, Eric Masson wrote:
Eric Masson writes:
Sorry, Followup to myself.
I'd try routed_enable = "YES" instead.
router_enable = "YES" as Michael stated in another post.
Regards
Éric Masson
The generic syntax of rc.conf is like so (using mine as example):
zfs_enable="YE
On 01/30/2012 06:53 PM, Eric Masson wrote:
Kaya Saman writes:
Hi,
does anyone know if there's an implementation of the RIP version 2
routing protocol in FreeBSD???
man 8 routed
I did check out the handbook for the enable_routerd="YES"
I'd try routed_enable = "YES
On 01/30/2012 06:47 PM, Michael Sierchio wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Kaya Saman wrote:
Hi there,
does anyone know if there's an implementation of the RIP version 2 routing
protocol in FreeBSD???
man routed
The routed utility is a daemon invoked at boot time to manag
Eric Masson writes:
Sorry, Followup to myself.
> I'd try routed_enable = "YES" instead.
router_enable = "YES" as Michael stated in another post.
Regards
Éric Masson
--
> et me dis quil y a eu une merde avec le serveur truc machin et que ca a
> fait un gros server crash. OU ets la merde???
Kaya Saman writes:
Hi,
> does anyone know if there's an implementation of the RIP version 2
> routing protocol in FreeBSD???
man 8 routed
> I did check out the handbook for the enable_routerd="YES"
I'd try routed_enable = "YES" instead.
Regards
Ér
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Kaya Saman wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> does anyone know if there's an implementation of the RIP version 2 routing
> protocol in FreeBSD???
man routed
The routed utility is a daemon invoked at boot time to manage the network
routing tables.
Hi there,
does anyone know if there's an implementation of the RIP version 2
routing protocol in FreeBSD???
I would like to use it to exchange routes with my Cisco 857W router as
the BSD machine will provide routing for a virtual test network in VBox.
I did check out the handbook fo
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Bernt Hansson wrote:
> 2012-01-28 05:40, Chris Maness skrev:
>
>> Executing route under linux displays all of the routing info for that
>> host. For the life of me I cannot figure out how to get the BSD route
>> command to dump the whol
Executing route under linux displays all of the routing info for that
host. For the life of me I cannot figure out how to get the BSD route
command to dump the whole table at once. I have used the GET flag to
find one specific entry. Is it possible to see all routes and once
like the Linux
On 01/14/12 16:28, Waitman Gobble wrote:
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Waitman Gobble wrote:
On Jan 13, 2012 7:19 AM, "Matthias Apitz" wrote:
El día Friday, January 13, 2012 a las 07:03:11AM -0800, Waitman Gobble
escribió:
Hi,
Thanks. I've always heard countless rumors about WPA being
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Waitman Gobble wrote:
>
> On Jan 13, 2012 7:19 AM, "Matthias Apitz" wrote:
> >
> > El día Friday, January 13, 2012 a las 07:03:11AM -0800, Waitman Gobble
> escribió:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Thanks. I've always heard countless rumors about WPA being wise :) I'll
On 01/14/12 01:38, Warren Block wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012, Waitman Gobble wrote:
Hello,
I am running 9.0-RC3 i386 on an Acer Aspire One D150. i am having
trouble
with the wireless setup.
I have two wireless cards, the BCM94312MCG that came with it, and an
Atheros 5424/2424 that i swapped o
On Jan 13, 2012 7:38 AM, "Warren Block" wrote:
>
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2012, Waitman Gobble wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am running 9.0-RC3 i386 on an Acer Aspire One D150. i am having trouble
>> with the wireless setup.
>>
>> I have two wireless cards, the BCM94312MCG that came with it, and an
>> Athero
On Jan 13, 2012 7:19 AM, "Matthias Apitz" wrote:
>
> El día Friday, January 13, 2012 a las 07:03:11AM -0800, Waitman Gobble
escribió:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thanks. I've always heard countless rumors about WPA being wise :) I'll
> > take your advice and take a step up in technology. My "stubborn
> > co
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012, Waitman Gobble wrote:
Hello,
I am running 9.0-RC3 i386 on an Acer Aspire One D150. i am having trouble
with the wireless setup.
I have two wireless cards, the BCM94312MCG that came with it, and an
Atheros 5424/2424 that i swapped out. I can run the BCM with ndis and the
wi
El día Friday, January 13, 2012 a las 07:03:11AM -0800, Waitman Gobble escribió:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks. I've always heard countless rumors about WPA being wise :) I'll
> take your advice and take a step up in technology. My "stubborn
> conservatism" probably roots back to the time when not all devices
ifconfig wlan0 up scan
>>>> ifconfig wlan0 inet 10.0.0.21 netmask 255.255.255.0 ssid CUDAPANG
>>>> wepmode
>>>> on weptxkey 1 wepkey 1:0x10961323931B628F844360718A
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> scan results:
>>>>
>>>> p
ping gw, no machine on lan or outside. (no route to host)
p00ntang# netstat -nr
Routing tables
Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire
default10.0.0.1 UGS 0 3338 ale0
10.0.0.0/24link#2 U 0
6 54M -69:-93 100 EPS ATH
>> CUDAPANG00:22:3f:9b:b8:aa6 54M -68:-93 100 EPS WME ATH
>> Abujie 00:14:6c:7a:98:ec6 54M -89:-93 100 EPS RSN WPA ATH
>> TDMA
>> chavez family 00:c0:02:11:22:336 54M -88:-93 100 EP HTCAP RSN
>> W
93 100 EP HTCAP RSN
WME WPS
My machine shows up on the wireless router as a "connected device" w/
correct mac and ip showing
But i cannot ping gw, no machine on lan or outside. (no route to host)
p00ntang# netstat -nr
Routing tables
Internet:
DestinationGatewayFl
4.125.224.116): 56 data bytes
ping: sendto: Network is down
Now I feel like i "need to go back to networking school 101". lol.
If anyone has a hint to solve my routing situation I'd really appreciate it!
Thanks,
Waitman Gobble
San Jose California USA
up on the wireless router as a "connected device" w/
correct mac and ip showing
But i cannot ping gw, no machine on lan or outside. (no route to host)
p00ntang# netstat -nr
Routing tables
Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire
default
On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Monkeyfoahead wrote:
>I have a question that I thought that you could probably answer. I
> have setup a freebsd seedbox in my apartment. This box has two internet
> connections (multi-homed server.). One is an ethernet connection behind a
> firewall that is
roaming MANUAL
The boxes routing table is as follows:
Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire
default1.1.3.1UGS 2245
>From : claudiu vasadi
To : jh...@socket.net
Subject : Re: IPSec routing (long post)
Date : Sat, 21 May 2011 18:45:07 +0200
Some additional points:
> - have you been following the FreeBSD handbook on this ? ->
> http://www.fre
routing the traffic. We using
a preshared key for authentication. The connection is successfully made.
My vendor has verified they are able to see the connection up on their
router and I am able to see a successful connection when running racoon in
the foreground. I am running FBSD 8.1
On Wednesday 27 of April 2011 01:15:09, Ryan Coleman wrote:
> Maciej,
> Here you go:
> Ryan-Colemans-MacBook-Pro:~ ryanjcole$ netstat -rn
> Routing tables
> Internet:
> DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif
> Expire default10
On Apr 26, 2011, at 9:07 AM, Diego Arias wrote:
>
> If you need to route LAN - TO - LAN just enable the client-to-client. Its a
> Security Feature of OpenVPN
>
> http://www.secure-computing.net/wiki/index.php/OpenVPN/Routing
>
I've done th
machine.
>> ...
>>> push "route 192.168.47.0 255.255.255.0"
>>
>> Have you tried adding the route to 192.168.46.0/24 subnet into the vpn
>> client?
>>
>> You want to ping the host/interface on different subnet. If you don't set
>&g
quot;
>
> Have you tried adding the route to 192.168.46.0/24 subnet into the vpn client?
>
> You want to ping the host/interface on different subnet. If you don't set the
> routing to this subnet how your client should know that he needs to put that
> packet through
client?
You want to ping the host/interface on different subnet. If you don't set the
routing to this subnet how your client should know that he needs to put that
packet through tap interface not defaultroute which I suspect is different?
Can you show the output of netstat -rn of the v
to udp
> >> remote sub.domain.ltd 1194
> >> nobind
> >> user nobody
> >> group nobody
> >> persist-key
> >> persist-tun
> >> #crl-verify
> >> #remote-cert-tls server
> >> ca keys/cacert.pem
> >> cert
key keys/ryanc.key
>> cipher BF-CBC
>> comp-lzo
>> verb 3
>> mute 20
>>
>> Any ideas? As I said, I can talk to the remote server, but not the local
>> LAN.
>>
>> To throw a new curveball in the mix, I'd like to talk to 192.168.45.0/24 -
&g
ther VPN connecting the two networks (not running on a VPN I
> can do much with).
>
>
> Thanks,
> Ryan_______
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe,
s. Please have a look for the example at
[1].
You may even not need bridging if you want to use two subnets of /24. Have you
tried with standard setup(server) and configuring your default gateway(I
suspect 192.168.46.1) with the routing information about openvpn subne
Also:
[root@nbserver1 /usr/home/ryanc]# ifconfig
em0: flags=8943 metric 0 mtu
1500
options=98
ether 00:14:22:15:dc:65
inet 192.168.46.2 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.46.255
media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT )
status: active
tap0: flags=8943 metric
I've got an OpenVPN connection working to my remote server, but I want to route
the traffic to the local LAN.
I have a bridge set up, pingable... but can't ping the em1 (192.168.46.2) from
the remote machine.
Server.conf:
local 192.168.46.2
port 1194
proto udp
dev tap
ca keys/cacert.pem
cert ke
DP as the root of the problem: it looks like
it is not aware of the addition of 2001:db8:0:1::/64 to the routing
table. I do not see any way to give the missing information to NDP
other than adding an address to em1. (Adding static entries for all the
clients would not be manageable in the long ru
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 06:43:11PM -0500, Robert Bonomi wrote:
Sorry, it _is_ impossible.
:(
simply put, to communicate _on_ a network, you have to be *ON* that
network, i.e., 'have an address in that network's address-space'.
I don't quite see why this would be required, as long as packets
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 08:50:53PM -0400, David Scheidt wrote:
On Apr 24, 2011, at 4:29 PM, Lionel Fourquaux wrote:
em0 has addresses fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abc and 2001:db8::1
em1 has address fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abd
Network 2001:db8::/64 is directly attached to em0, and network
2001:db8:0:1::
On Apr 24, 2011, at 4:29 PM, Lionel Fourquaux wrote:
> Dear FreeBSD users,
>
> Consider an IPv6 router with two interfaces, e.g. em0 and em1.
> em0 has addresses fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abc and 2001:db8::1
> em1 has address fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abd
> Network 2001:db8::/64 is directly attached to
routed
to. The router already has a valid routable address on em0
which can be used as source address for ICMP, and it has an
address on em1 (the link local one) which can be used for
NDP and routing. So:
1. Is there a way to set up the router the way I want it?
2. If not, why is it not possible?
> From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Fri Apr 8 18:19:15 2011
> From: Steven Friedrich
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 19:18:25 -0400
> Subject: Marble and routing
>
> I'm in the U.S., so I believe that my only valid choice is Open
I'm in the U.S., so I believe that my only valid choice is OpenRoute service.
Does it require any subscription payment, os is it available free?
--
System Name: doris.StevenFriedrich.org
Window Manager(s): kde4-4.6.2
X Window System: xorg-7.5.1X.Org X Server 1.7.7
OS version:
gt; be added (by default) in FREEBSD 8.0/7.2 kernel?
> >>> In Linux the sysctl rt_max_size is used. Is there a similar tunable
> >>> parameter in freeBSD?
> >>>
> >> [snip]
> >
> >
> >> I could not find a sysctl that matched what you
>> parameter in freeBSD?
>>>
>> [snip]
>
>
>> I could not find a sysctl that matched what you're looking for.
>>
>> AFAIK, the routing table is limited only by the amount of RAM you can
>> allocate to it.
>>
>
> Yes. You can use "vm
freeBSD?
[snip]
I could not find a sysctl that matched what you're looking for.
AFAIK, the routing table is limited only by the amount of RAM you can
allocate to it.
Yes. You can use "vmstat -z | grep rtentry" to examine it.
It seems trivial to add a limit there(without having thou
er-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of nikitha
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 8:01 AM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Tuning routing table size in FreeBSD 8.0 and 7.2
Hi,
Could you plz share the information on the maximum number of routes that can
be added (by default) in FREEB
send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
I could not find a sysctl that matched what you're looking for.
AFAIK, the routing table is limited only by the amount of RAM you can
allocate to it.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org ma
Hi,
Could you plz share the information on the maximum number of routes that can
be added (by default) in FREEBSD 8.0/7.2 kernel?
In Linux the sysctl rt_max_size is used. Is there a similar tunable
parameter in freeBSD?
Your earliest reply in this regard is much appreciated.
Thanks for any inputs
As mentioned before, this is already solved.
On Nov 12, 2010, at 3:08 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>> ff02::%lo0/32 fe80::1%lo0 U
>> lo0
>>
>> ifconfig_em0="inet 70.89.123.5 netmask 255.255.255.248"
>> ifconfig_em1="inet 70.89.123.4 netmask 255.25
ff02::%lo0/32 fe80::1%lo0 U lo0
ifconfig_em0="inet 70.89.123.5 netmask 255.255.255.248"
ifconfig_em1="inet 70.89.123.4 netmask 255.255.255.248"
defaultrouter="70.89.123.6"
hostname="se**.somehtingelse.biz"
I tried to add the gateway for link2
t have two L3 nets, but two ips on the
> same net - nothing to route, except the default.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org
>
> To: Free BSD Questions list
> Sent: Thu Nov 11 21:41:40 2010
> Subject: Routing issue?
>
> I&
What exactly isn't working? You don't have two L3 nets, but two ips on the same
net - nothing to route, except the default.
- Original Message -
From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org
To: Free BSD Questions list
Sent: Thu Nov 11 21:41:40 2010
Subject: Routing issue?
I&#
I'm trying to get the other half of my business up on my second IP.
It's not routing. This is not a multi-homed system, but two IPs in the same
subnet.
[r...@server /usr/home/ryan]# netstat -nr
Routing tables
Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs
On 8/27/2010 9:09 PM, Doug Hardie wrote:
On 27 August 2010, at 05:07, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:
Le Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:17:19 -0700, Doug Hardie a
écrit :
PF's route_to will return the packets to the proper router, but I
have not been able to figure out which ones those would be. The
source
On 27 August 2010, at 05:07, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:
> Le Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:17:19 -0700,
> Doug Hardie a écrit :
>
>> PF's route_to will return the packets to the proper router, but I have not
>> been able to figure out which ones those would be. The source IP
>> address can be any on eith
Le Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:17:19 -0700,
Doug Hardie a écrit :
> PF's route_to will return the packets to the proper router, but I have not
> been able to figure out which ones those would be. The source IP
> address can be any on either network and its highly likely that we
> will see packets from
I have several servers with one ethernet interface. Currently it is connected
via a WAN to the internet. We are in the midst of switching to a different
provider. I would like to be able to operate with both temporarily until all
the users/services get switched. The new circuit is in and wor
On Wednesday 12 of May 2010 06:07, Glenn Sieb wrote:
> I'm getting a route added upon reboot with the hostname of the box,
> going to lo0.
> It's preventing things like, pinging itself. I can manually delete the
> route, but.. where is it being set to begin with?!
well, that behaviour is what i wo
Running: FreeBSD caduceus.wingfoot.org 8.0-RELEASE-p2 FreeBSD
8.0-RELEASE-p2 #42: Fri May 7 19:22:48 EDT 2010
r...@caduceus.wingfoot.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SANDALS amd64
I'm getting a route added upon reboot with the hostname of the box,
going to lo0.
It's preventing things like, pinging itse
Hello,
It seems that deleting a route which does not exist gives some message
about "writing to routing socket: No such process":
# route delete xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/27
delete net xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
# route delete xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/27
route: writing to routing socket: No such process
using vpn with routing that allows ServerA to connect to
private jails in ServerB and vice versa.
ServerA
(10.1.0.1_tun0,192.168.1.1_bge0,192.168.1.2_bge0,127.0.1.1_lo1,127.0.1.1_lo1)
- JailA(192.168.1.2_bge0)
- JailB(127.0.1.1_lo1)
- JailC(127.0.1.1_lo1)
ServerB
192.168.0.100.
Any help suggestions greatly appreciated.
JP
===
netstat -rn results below:
$ netstat -rn
Routing tables
Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif
Expire
default192.168.0.1UGS 0 3082vr0
127.0.0.
On 6/17/09, Mike Sweetser - Adhost wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We have a network with a VPN device sitting beside a PF server, both
> connected to an internal network.
>
> PF Server: 10.1.4.1
> VPN Device: 10.1.4.200
>
> The VPNs are set up for 10.1.1.0/24 and 10.1.2.0/24, so any traffic to
> these networ
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Valentin Bud wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:31 PM, Mike Sweetser - Adhost <
> mik...@adhost.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> We have a network with a VPN device sitting beside a PF server, both
>> connected to an internal network.
>>
>> PF Server: 10.1.4.1
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Valentin Bud [mailto:valentin@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 1:36 AM
> To: Mike Sweetser - Adhost
> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: PF Routing to VPN Device
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:31 PM, Mike Sweetser - Adhost
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We have a network with a VPN device sitting beside a PF server, both
> connected to an internal network.
>
> PF Server: 10.1.4.1
> VPN Device: 10.1.4.200
>
> The VPNs are set up for 10.1.1.0/24 and 10.1.2.0/24, so any tra
Hello,
We have a network with a VPN device sitting beside a PF server, both
connected to an internal network.
PF Server: 10.1.4.1
VPN Device: 10.1.4.200
The VPNs are set up for 10.1.1.0/24 and 10.1.2.0/24, so any traffic to
these networks should be routed to 10.1.4.200. We've set up routes on
Hello Nikos,
thank you very much Nikos
"You've repaired my internet" ,)
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 06:56:49PM +0300, Nikos Vassiliadis wrote:
> Fabian Holler wrote:
> > I have an strange routing problem. I can't connect to some hosts in the
> > internet till I a
Fabian Holler wrote:
Hello,
I have an strange routing problem. I can't connect to some hosts in the
internet till I add an explicit route for this hosts with my default gw
as gateway.
There aren't any other routes that could match the destination IP for
"non-working hosts"
Hello,
I have an strange routing problem. I can't connect to some hosts in the
internet till I add an explicit route for this hosts with my default gw
as gateway.
There aren't any other routes that could match the destination IP for
"non-working hosts". So the connection sh
lient,
everythink works again like it should.
Not enough info to tell, but, consider the output of "netstat -nr"
before and after the IP reassignment, and you'll probably notice a
routing table change which is causing your other LAN clients to send
traffic the wrong way
Hi,
I'm using openvpn to connect my vpn-gateway at home to an external
server, both are FreeBSD-boxes (6.2-STABLE).
The external server has an fixed IP, the client at home connects to a
router, which gets a new IP every 24 hours.
The client is configured as router (gateway_enable="YES") which w
Hi,
I'm using openvpn to connect my vpn-gateway at home to an external
server, both are FreeBSD-boxes (6.2-STABLE).
The external server has an fixed IP, the client at home connects to a
router, which gets a new IP every 24 hours.
The client is configured as router (gateway_enable="YES") which w
al
> > > "default" routes (to the router) for each of the vlans short of
> > > tucking the ezjails behind the vlan interfaces each into their own
> > > FIB (btw,. has anyone ever done that?)?
> >
> > Yes, from FreeBSD-7.1 and beyond, there is support
>
1 - 100 of 665 matches
Mail list logo
