7;s how it knows to reach you, that's where it will
go.
If your two networks can't both reach your source network, then yes, it
will break.
There are workarounds, most involve either a dynamic routing protocol
that can assign priorites to the different paths, or introducing an
exte
> > ifconfig_dc0 inet 1.2.3.4 netmask 255.255.255.248
> > ifconfig_dc0_alias0 inet 2.3.4.5 netmask 255.255.255.248
> > defaultrouter="1.2.3.1"
>
> You need to change your netmask for the alias to 255.255.255.255 if it's
> on the same network.
It's not on the same network; that's the problem. Two
On Mon, 2004-07-19 at 11:12, Web Walrus (Robert Wall) wrote:
> I just installed a secondary internet connection at my office, and I'm
> having a bizarre issue...
>
> I have a network card - dc0
>
> That network card has a config roughly like
>
> ifconfig_dc0 inet 1.2.3.4 netmask 255.255.255.248
I just installed a secondary internet connection at my office, and I'm
having a bizarre issue...
I have a network card - dc0
That network card has a config roughly like
ifconfig_dc0 inet 1.2.3.4 netmask 255.255.255.248
ifconfig_dc0_alias0 inet 2.3.4.5 netmask 255.255.255.248
defaultrouter="1.2.3
a great benefit to my company and his response
> > was Routing, IP and subnetting (ok so more then one. But I swear he can
> > count).
> >
> > So here I am with maybe a month before they make a decision and I am
> > thinking I should beef up on my skills.
> >
&g
r should probably be willing to purchase a reference
> book or two. I'm not sure what kind of gear you're running at work, but
> you can get a good feel for how things work by playing with routed on
> your FreeBSD box.
>
> Subnetting Tutorial - http://www.ral
> After many years of waiting my company has a position opening up that I
> can fill. I spoke with the Net Admin and asked if there were any one skill
> that would be of a great benefit to my company and his response was
> Routing, IP and subnetting (ok so more then one. But I swear he
Here are a couple of books I have read and would suggest. They are not free
but they are worth it...
Routing TCP/IP Volume I (CCIE Professional Development)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1578700418/qid=1089749604/sr=1
-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-0916091-2402328?v=glance&s=books
Rou
After many years of waiting my company has a position opening up that I
can fill. I spoke with the Net Admin and asked if there were any one skill
that would be of a great benefit to my company and his response was
Routing, IP and subnetting (ok so more then one. But I swear he can
count).
So
004 12:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Routing problem in IPv4/IPSec VPN environment
As a personal favor, I am building a VPN for a small business. I
have chosen FreeBSD for this due to my greater familiarity. The
project will consist of linking four sites, each with a FreeBSD
system providing
- Original Message -
From: "James P. Howard, II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 2:57 PM
Subject: Routing problem in IPv4/IPSec VPN environment
> As a personal favor, I am building a VPN for a small business. I
>
his point, this is some type
of routing issue and not a problem with IPSec. This seems to be
confirmed by the fact tracerouting to the local internal interface
goes through the *other* internal interface first:
waltwhitman$ ifconfig bge1; traceroute 10.1.2.1
bge1: flags=8843 mtu 1500
options
, if behind the 10.1.2.1 firewall, I cannot ping
10.1.1.1 and vice-versa. I assume, at this point, this is some type
of routing issue and not a problem with IPSec. This seems to be
confirmed by the fact tracerouting to the local internal interface
goes through the *other* internal interface firs
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Andre Rein wrote:
> I'm able to ping 10.0.0.1 now from my vpnclient and ping the
> vpnclient from 10.0.0.1 without any trouble.
>
> The only problem I get, is to ping the vpnclient from the vpnserver.
> It won't work.
> So how should I setup the server to ping the client?
> Am
Hi Ml,
got a little understanding problem with my VPN connection.
I set up isakmpd. Connected from a static client ip.
Everything works fine.
10.0.1.0---195.226.x.98[INTERNET]195.226.x.124---10.0.0.0
gif0: flags=8050 mtu 1280
tunnel inet 195.226.x.124 --> 195.226
]
Sent: 11 June 2004 18:12
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Routing question
Leon,
This is possible, but will require you to run static routes so that you can
manually manage the connections. You should be able to set the routing
metrics so that all your traffic from client D goes to B and if they
]
Sent: 11 June 2004 18:16
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Routing question
Perhaps if you post more info, we can come up with creative solutions for
you. My big question is why?
AFAIK, you cannot have more than one default gateway, unless you are using
netgraph to balance
Perhaps if you post more info, we can come up with creative solutions
for you. My big question is why?
AFAIK, you cannot have more than one default gateway, unless you are
using netgraph to balance between network interfaces. However, you could
NAT C & D to their respective "public" interfaces.
I have a box with 5 nics.
Cal them A,B,C,D,E.
A & B are different internet connections.
E is a connection to a mail server on a public /29
C & D are connections for 2 differnet client networks.
Is it possible to have all traffic coming in via C sent to a default gateway
on A's network and
all traf
8
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 11:29 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: routing question
> >
> >
Behalf Of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 11:29 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: routing question
>
>
> I am trying to configure a wireless router so I am redefining
> routes and IP address of my system. After booting dhclient
> ep0 works fine. Af
I am trying to configure a wireless router so I am redefining routes and IP
address of my system. After booting dhclient ep0 works fine. After messing
around with the wireless router I was just going back to my ethernet connection
so I did:
ifconfig ep0 192.168.0.3 remove
arp -da
route fl
gt;
> BM> Typically, only ~80% of available bandwidth is usable. I don't know if
> BM> that applies to your situation, though, as that's usually referring to
> BM> ethernet, and you claim the problem hasn't always been there.
>
> BM> Try polling and see
gt;I think it is quite high? right?
>>
>> BM> I guess. I would expect numbers like that considering the load it's
>> BM> under.
>>
>> BM> I'll ask _again_ ... is the machine's performance poor? Fact is, if
>> BM> you give it enough
network traffic to shape, it's going to raise the
>> BM> CPU load, no matter what you do.
>>
>> now the main problem is.. that machine is shaping internet, right?
>> I did shaping for my subnet, so users in /24 have 100kbits everybody.
>> But they don't
if
that applies to your situation, though, as that's usually referring to
ethernet, and you claim the problem hasn't always been there.
Try polling and see if the load reduces and the performance increases.
If all that machine is doing is routing, you can configure it to be
dedicated to routin
BM> hugle wrote:
>> BM> hugle wrote:
>>
FG> On Mon, 31 May 2004, hugle wrote:
>>dammit..
>>why then my users eats so much CPU?
>>look:
>>CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.8% system, 38.0% interrupt, 61.2% idle
>>Mem: 21M Active, 177M Inact, 133M Wired, 1228K Cache
hugle wrote:
BM> hugle wrote:
FG> On Mon, 31 May 2004, hugle wrote:
dammit..
why then my users eats so much CPU?
look:
CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.8% system, 38.0% interrupt, 61.2% idle
Mem: 21M Active, 177M Inact, 133M Wired, 1228K Cache, 199M Buf, 1677M Free
I have only 61% idle ?
usua
BM> hugle wrote:
>> FG> On Mon, 31 May 2004, hugle wrote:
>>
dammit..
why then my users eats so much CPU?
look:
CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.8% system, 38.0% interrupt, 61.2% idle
Mem: 21M Active, 177M Inact, 133M Wired, 1228K Cache, 199M Buf, 1677M Free
I ha
hugle wrote:
FG> On Mon, 31 May 2004, hugle wrote:
dammit..
why then my users eats so much CPU?
look:
CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.8% system, 38.0% interrupt, 61.2% idle
Mem: 21M Active, 177M Inact, 133M Wired, 1228K Cache, 199M Buf, 1677M Free
I have only 61% idle ?
usualy i have ~50 idl
FG> On Mon, 31 May 2004, hugle wrote:
>> dammit..
>> why then my users eats so much CPU?
>> look:
>> CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.8% system, 38.0% interrupt, 61.2% idle
>> Mem: 21M Active, 177M Inact, 133M Wired, 1228K Cache, 199M Buf, 1677M Free
>>
>> I have only 61% idle ?
>> usualy i
On Mon, 31 May 2004, hugle wrote:
> dammit..
> why then my users eats so much CPU?
> look:
> CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.8% system, 38.0% interrupt, 61.2% idle
> Mem: 21M Active, 177M Inact, 133M Wired, 1228K Cache, 199M Buf, 1677M Free
>
> I have only 61% idle ?
> usualy i have ~50 idl
hugle wrote:
[ ... ]
why then my users eats so much CPU?
look:
CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.8% system, 38.0% interrupt, 61.2% idle
Mem: 21M Active, 177M Inact, 133M Wired, 1228K Cache, 199M Buf, 1677M Free
I have only 61% idle ?
usualy i have ~50 idle..
now I have P4 2.4GHZ
maybe my setup
hugle wrote:
FG> On Mon, 31 May 2004, hugle wrote:
The question in what machine do i need?
What CPU and how much of ram ?
FG> I set up a firewall for more than 300 users, a DMZ with a public webserver,
FG> webmail and MX on a PII-350MHz with 128 MB RAM.
dammit..
why then my users eats so much CPU?
FG> On Mon, 31 May 2004, hugle wrote:
>> The question in what machine do i need?
>> What CPU and how much of ram ?
FG> I set up a firewall for more than 300 users, a DMZ with a public webserver,
FG> webmail and MX on a PII-350MHz with 128 MB RAM.
dammit..
why then my users eats so much CPU?
look:
On Mon, 31 May 2004, hugle wrote:
> The question in what machine do i need?
> What CPU and how much of ram ?
I set up a firewall for more than 300 users, a DMZ with a public webserver,
webmail and MX on a PII-350MHz with 128 MB RAM.
On another client, I set up a firewall for 50 users with a Pent
Hello all.
I run into some problem here
Let's take, that I have 10mbit internet and 1000 users behind the
router.
All I want to do is to NAT internet over all of these users
give some users external IPs (BIMAP in ipfilter)
And olso do traffic shaping, like:
Some IP groups (10.0.0.0/24) one pipe -
On Wednesday 26 May 2004 18:25, Leon Botes wrote:
> I have a freebsd 4.7 box at a client.
> The box has an ip of 192.168.254.22
> The default gateway is 192.168.254.1 which is the inside interface of the
> gateway. The outside interface of the gateway is 196.25.37.18 and it also
> has an alias of 1
Lamprecht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 26 May 2004 13:55
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Help with a routing issue
One other thing you can try. There is a sysctl variable
net.inet.ip.redirect: 1
Try turning that off by setting it to 0 on the client machine.
What happens ?
Nelis
On Wed
On Wed, 2004-05-26 at 12:28, Leon Botes wrote:
> The below is only sections of the output. Most of the individual hosts have
> been removed. Just a few examples left.
> 10.5/16192.168.254.29 UGSc0 11 fxp1
> 10.6/16192.168.254.12 UGSc0
Can you show us the routing on the server please rather than the client ?
What is the subnet mask of the alias 196.25.37.19 ? It should have a subnet
of 255.255.255.255 as it's on the same network as 196.25.37.18.
Cheers,
--
Nelis Lamprecht
PGP: http://www.8ball.co.za/pgpkey/nelis.asc
&qu
Could you provide the output of ifconfig -a of the gateway box?
Should shed some more light about the issues, also the parts of
/etc/rc.conf, where the cards are configured, could be interesting.
Olaf
--
Olaf Hoyer[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fuerchterliche Erlebniss geben zu raten, ob der, welche
has an alias of 196.25.37.19.
Can you show us the routing on the server please rather than the client
? What is the subnet mask of the alias 196.25.37.19 ? It should have a
subnet of 255.255.255.255 as it's on the same network as 196.25.37.18.
Your /etc/rc.conf file should look something like
On Wed, 26 May 2004, Leon Botes wrote:
> I have a freebsd 4.7 box at a client.
> The box has an ip of 192.168.254.22
> The default gateway is 192.168.254.1 which is the inside interface of the
> gateway. The outside interface of the gateway is 196.25.37.18 and it also
> has an alias of 196.25.37.1
=5.226 ms
That is correct the way it should be.
My routes on the clients box look as follows:
mmrserver# netstat -rn
Routing tables
Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire
default192.168.254.1 UGSc7 1952dc0
127.0.0.1
used. The firewall is a hardware box meaning no software can be
altered.
Crazy idea: I have an idea about routing traffic through the server
and then to the firewall. This would make it possible for the server
to see that there's traffic on port 80 which should be prioritized
over traffic
above made sense. Any help appreciated.
You're not providing enough information - this could have tons of reasons.
For a start, it would be helpful to see the intetface configuration and the
routing tables from the hosts in question.
Also, did you make sure you don't simply have packet fi
Hello,
I've got three FreeBSD machines, a 4.9, and two 4.7 boxes. They're on a
small local network with a hub. Each is given an IP statically via dhcp
based on their nic mac address. All machines obtain a dhcp lease, machines a
and c can ssh and ping each other and have no issues. My problem is
Hi,
I have a problem using mpd as a PPTP client on FreeBSD 5.2. The connection is
successfully established but I can't do anything with it.
Using tcpdump I can see that GRE packets are sent through the rl0 interface
during the connection establishing but later they are sent over the ng0. If I
con
to switch to wlan (ath0), i shut down the dc0 interface
(ifconfig dc0 down), enable the wlan card, (ifconfig ath0 inet 192.168.1.3 ssid daemon
&
ifconfig ath0 up).
then i flush my routing table (route flush) and add default gateway (route add default
On Apr 2, 2004, at 6:30 AM, Ivailo Bonev wrote:
How can i route packets from Internet to my private network without
exposed Internet address?
People cannot route traffic to your network unless you've got a
publicly routable IP address available for them to talk to. Talk to
your ISP, that is who
How can i route packets from Internet to my private network without exposed Internet
address?
Inet
|
NAT - ISP - 192.168/16 with Gateway 192.168.0.1
|
My FreeBSD Router on ISP Net 192.168.6.18
My FreeBSD Router on Private Net - 10.0.0.1
|
My private network - 10.0.0/24
Pls reply to me pr
Sorry to cross-post this question, but I wanted to make sure my thinking
is on track regarding a FreeBSD box I am going to use for
routing/firewalling.
A wireless project I am working on is getting 2 T1's from Global
Crossing that I want to bring into a Sangoma dual CSU/DSU card (using
On 03/14/04 08:35 AM, Lowell Gilbert sat at the `puter and typed:
> Louis LeBlanc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I have a strange network question.
> >
> > I finally found the vpn client that actually manages to open a
> > connection to the Cisco vpn appliance my employer uses with a minimum
>
Louis LeBlanc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a strange network question.
>
> I finally found the vpn client that actually manages to open a
> connection to the Cisco vpn appliance my employer uses with a minimum
> of pain (security/vpnc). The problem I'm having is making it possible
> for
I have a strange network question.
I finally found the vpn client that actually manages to open a
connection to the Cisco vpn appliance my employer uses with a minimum
of pain (security/vpnc). The problem I'm having is making it possible
for my FreeBSD desktop at work to retain access to my FreeB
You wrote:
>I have 2 nics. The first has about 30 ips assigned to it and working
> correctly. The other was a backup nic for the ISP backup network, but its
> now I was asked to assign ips and a default gateway specification to
> it,because we ran out of usable ips on the 1st nic, so we have a new
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, SixthSense Server Admin wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I need help on this problem:
>
> I have 2 nics. The first has about 30 ips assigned to it and working
> correctly. The other was a backup nic for the ISP backup network, but its
> now I was asked to assign ips and a default gatew
Hi list,
I need help on this problem:
I have 2 nics. The first has about 30 ips assigned to it and working
correctly. The other was a backup nic for the ISP backup network, but its
now I was asked to assign ips and a default gateway specification to
it,because we ran out of usable ips on the 1st
On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 03:40:04PM -0500, Marius Kirschner wrote:
> I have a 4.9 box that's on a public IP and I want to configure Samba so it
> only accepts connections from the private network (192.168.1). My question
> is, can I do that with only 1 NIC card or do I have to add a second NIC for
Behalf Of Marius
Kirschner
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 3:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Routing question -- Samba
I have a 4.9 box that's on a public IP and I want to configure Samba so
it
only accepts connections from the private network (192.168.1). My
question
is, can I do that
You can do that within the smb.conf
Use SWAT, advanced options, I think just for the share...
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Marius Kirschner
> Sent: Monday, 9 February 2004 12:40
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have a 4.9 box that's on a public IP and I want to configure Samba so it
only accepts connections from the private network (192.168.1). My question
is, can I do that with only 1 NIC card or do I have to add a second NIC for
the private LAN?
---Marius
__
"Roland Wells" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I guess this is more a question (that could be a possible solution);
>
> Could you just Bridge all the seperate physical networks, and leave
> firewalling and NAT to be done by the router, or lets say, on another
> FreeBSD box connected to the dsl mode
> "Sjaak Nabuurs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Wireless USERS
> Wireless USERS
> >
> >W W W W W W W
> W W W W W
> > |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-|
> |-| |-| |-| |-| |-|
> > |-| |-| |-| |-| |-|
"Sjaak Nabuurs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Wireless USERS Wireless USERS
>
>W W W W W W W W W W W W
> |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-|
>
Wireless USERS Wireless USERS
W W W W W W W W W W W W
|-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-|
|-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-| |-|
Dear all
I have a cable modem hooked up as my default gateway and running natd for
my clients on XL0
I have another modem is I want to put on the same box on a different nic sis0
Problem is the remote gateway is the same for both IP's address due to the
fact its the same ISP
I get messages sa
Dear all
I have a cable modem hooked up as my default gateway and runing natd for my
clients on XL0
I have another modem is I want to put on the same box on a diffrent nic sis0
the problem is the remote gateway is the same for both IP's address
and we get msgs saying that xxx is on sis0 but got
Hi :)
Allright, so, I've been trying to build a routing setup for some weeks now,
and after looking everywhere and asking for help, I still cannot find the
answer.
Here is what I want to do: source routing to 2 internet connections.
Basically, I want net1 to go on the Internet using ga
.3"
regards.
Hi all, I need some help routing or making Nat on a LAN.
I have something like this:
I N T E R N E T
-
^ ^
| |
fxp0 pub
.3"
regards.
Hi all, I need some help routing or making Nat on a LAN.
I have something like this:
I N T E R N E T
-
^ ^
| |
fxp0 pub
Hi all, I need some help routing or making Nat on a LAN.
I have something like this:
I N T E R N E T
-
^ ^
| |
fxp0 public IP public IP
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, David Miller wrote:
> Isn't this equivilent to selecting the outbound route? You want to
> select 10.a.b.c uf you want the connection routed out ISP 1 and
> 192.168.x.y otherwise.
yes it is.
> There are bizzare cases where it might make sense to try and load
> balance two
all works fine now.
Oops. Now if I had a dollar for every time *I'd* done something like
that...
>
> > Zebra implemets a number of routing protocols, including bgp. With BGP
> > you can pick the best route *out* for your packet, but everyone else's
> > BGP sessions wi
/16. the mistake kept
perpetuating because i kept using the shell's history to run the
traceroute, and the mind could not tell the difference between the 0 and
the 1. my bad, and much apologies. all works fine now.
> Zebra implemets a number of routing protocols, including bgp. With BG
ould i be doing to get the behaviour i desire ?
By the sounds of it, exactly what you are doing. Can you show us a
traceroute that isn't working normally? Are you running any routing
protocols, like routed?
> a secondary question is, with the /usr/ports/net/zebra package, can i
>
hey,
i'm on a multihomed FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE, cvsupped and built to -STABLE as
of two weeks ago. the two NICs on the box each go to different ADSL
providers. right now, i can switch which provider i use by just manually
changing the default route. however, what i'd like to do is to have the
defau
Hello everybody :)
I have a routing question and was wondering if FreeBSD was able to do this.
I have 2 ISPs (so 2 connections).
Can I use only one FreeBSD box as a gateway to:
- route LAN --> INTERNET (using connection 1)
- route DMZ --> INTERNET (using connection 2)
- route LAN --> DM
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
>
> Good luck. I have tried to get this working, but have never been able
> to get mpd encryption to work with the Concentrator's encryption
> (neither has anyone else to my knowledge). If you disable encryption on
> the concentrator, the tunnel will
Original message from Joe Marcus Clarke:
> I was able to get past the routing loop by readdressing the interface as
> soon as it came up. This is a good starter howto on that procedure:
>
> http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~flemej/fbsd-cisco-vpn/fbsd-cisco-vpn.pdf
Yeah I went through this,
when trying to send data, I
get decryption errors (the concentrator reports invalid packets).
>
> And capturing on the interface, I see echo req's coming in from the
> concentrator, but I encounter a routing loop when I try to send across
> the tunnel.
I was able to get past
Oh. :( I thought it negotiated the encryption ok because I see this:
[ciscovpn] CCP: LayerUp
Compress using: MPPE, 128 bit, stateless
Decompress using: MPPE, 128 bit, stateless
And capturing on the interface, I see echo req's coming in from the
concentrator, but I encounter a routing
e
>
> A little investigation showed that this is a known routing issue and
> that it is possible to work around by re-addressing the ng0 interface
> with the VPN concentrator's private IP and set a default route to it. I
> did this, but I still have the same problem.
but when I try to do anything I get this:
$ ping 10.10.58.7
PING 10.10.58.7 (10.10.58.7): 56 data bytes
ping: sendto: Resource deadlock avoided
ping: sendto: No buffer space available
A little investigation showed that this is a known routing issue and
that it is possib
Well, I have this problem again, I hope I get help at this time, not big
problem, its just something I'm missing here.
interface to net: ep0
interface to lan: xl0
ep0 has 2001:a68:2:10::2/64 with default gw 2001:a68:2:10:: and she works
fine.
xl0 should have 2001:a68:2:10:dead::/96
ifconfig ep0 i
Well, I got this fun routing problem again; so here it goes.
I have a router, which gets native ipv6 on xl0 with block 2001:a6x:2:1x::/64
and she has also lan-interface.
My idea was to route 2001:a6x:2:1x:dead::/96 to lan interface so i thought
doing as follows; added 2001:a6x:2:1x::3/64 to lan
x27;t route the packets from
internal machines through natd on the external interface as you
describe. It's just the way that natd works, I'm afraid.
> If this question is too arcane, please refer me to the correct
> documentation. I don't even know where to start. Routi
es, through the internal
> interface of the firewall, to the external interface of the firewall, back
> through the port address translation to my internal nameservers?
>
> If this question is too arcane, please refer me to the correct
> documentation. I don't even know where
, back
through the port address translation to my internal nameservers?
If this question is too arcane, please refer me to the correct
documentation. I don't even know where to start. Routing has always just
magically worked on FreeBSD. I would think it would be possible to add
some sort of m
mask 255.255.255.0
defaultrouter 10.0.0.1
From a client machine on the 10.0.0.0 network, I can ping
both de0 and rl0 on the gateway, but I cannot get any traffic
past rl0 to the cable modem from the LAN client. That is
where my minimal understanding of routing ends. I do not
know why I cannot p
you.
--
Best Regards,
Joshua Lokken
From: Clayton F <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "joshua lokken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Routing problem
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 12:52:47 -0800
This setup appears a little confusing. Does your ISP give you a sta
This setup appears a little confusing. Does your ISP give you a static
or dynamic IP address to the internet? It would also help to see the
interface configuration info in your rc.conf file.
generally speaking, your external interface should have the ip address
assigned by your isp, not a priv
> LAN clients can access boh gateway interfaces by hostname and IP. Clients
> are
> setup to use 192.168.1.2 for DNS, and 192.168.1.2 uses 192.168.1.1 for DNS.
> I cannot get any traffic to reach (let alone pass) the DSL modem from the
> clients.
>
> I have tried this with the FreeBSD gateway,
Hello,
Running 4.9-stable. Here is a brief overview of the network I'm setting up.
***Internet***
|
DSL modem (192.168.1.1, netmask 255.255.255.252, assigned by ISP)
|
FreeBSD gateway external (192.168.1.2, netmask 255.255.255.252, assigned by
ISP)
|
FreeBSD ga
he /28 subnet via your original connection. [The inverse of
> -unregistered_only.]
>
> > 3. Finally, I've read (briefly thus far) about routed on FreeBSD.
> > Would
> > this daemon be used in such a way that I don't even need to add static
> > routes fo
don't even need to add static
routes for LAN?
Yes, but routed is really intended for dynamic routing within an
intranet, and is overkill for your situation. Specificly, you would
accomplish more by configuring DHCP on your FreeBSD machine and
broadcasting the correct default router IP than you
n wrote:
>Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 18:50:08 -0500
>From: "Tom Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>X-Mailer:
>Subject: IPSEC Tunnel Routing question
>
>I would like to route all traffic over a gif/ipsec tunnel
>
>I have the following s
I think I figured out the problem but am unsure how to fix it
To recap my situation is as follows
Internet connection located in Building A(independent of BSD boxes)
FreeBSD 5.1 machine located at Building A
FreeBSD 5.1 machine located at Building B
Building-To-Building wireless between building A
ROTECTED]>
X-Mailer:
Subject: IPSEC Tunnel Routing question
I would like to route all traffic over a gif/ipsec tunnel
I have the following situation
Existing internet connection in building A
Building to building wireless(between building A and Building B)
To secure the traffic going across the
401 - 500 of 665 matches
Mail list logo
