FreeBSD routing problem

2013-10-03 Thread hrkesh sahu
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
Network2 with 2001:db8::3::/64 .

Ø  Configured a static route on TAR-RouterD ( ubuntu) Indicating
REF-Router2’s Link local address as the next hop for the Network2 .

Ø  But Ref-Router Not able to routes between Network1 and Network2.  Due to
this ICMPv6 request from TAR-router to the global address of REF-Host2 is
not working. There is no reply for this ICMPv6 request.

Ø  Same when I try to transmit ICMPv6 Echo request from REF-HOST2 to global
address of TAR-HOST1( Prefix of TAR-RouterD), no ICMPv6 reply.

Ø  Within Network1 , nodes are able to communicate. But when I try to
communicate Netwrok2 from Network1, it is not working.



Could you please suggest tell me if I am missing something to route the
traffic on REF-Router ?



I suspect  , as there is no Route Advertisement on Interface1 of the
Ref-Router, it is not able to route the traffic between the interfaces.



Please help me to find this solution.

 Regards
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

Re: FreeBSD routing problem

2013-10-03 Thread Julian H. Stacey

 From: hrkesh sahu hrisikeshs...@gmail.com
 Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 19:09:02 +0530
 To: Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com
 Cc: Polytropon free...@edvax.de,
 FreeBSD questions freebsd-questions@freebsd.org

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-printable, 


 Content-Type: application/msword; name=1.5.VendorD.Topology.doc
 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=1.5.VendorD.Topology.doc

MS excrement not accepted.  http://www.berklix.com/~jhs/std/no_ms_format.txt

Cheers,
Julian
-- 
Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com
 Reply below not above, like a play script.  Indent old text with  .
 Send plain text.  No quoted-printable, HTML, base64, multipart/alternative.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


openvpn routing

2013-07-16 Thread Pol Hallen
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  10.20.10.2 UGS 00   tun0
10.20.10.1 link#5 UHS 00lo0
10.20.10.2 link#5 UH  00   tun0
127.0.0.1  link#4 UH  0 3478lo0
192.168.1.0/24 link#2 U   046116em0
192.168.1.254  link#2 UHS 00lo0

ifconfig

em0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
inet 192.168.1.254 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255
lo0: flags=8049UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 16384
[...]
tun0: flags=8051UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
inet 10.20.10.1 -- 10.20.10.2 netmask 0x

Problem is: 10.20.10.2 is a gateway? why?

On clients I've this error:

OpenVPN ROUTE: OpenVPN needs a gateway parameter for a --route option and
no default was specified by either --route-gateway or --ifconfig options
Tue Jul 16 19:28:30 2013 us=860975 OpenVPN ROUTE: failed to parse/resolve
route for host/network: 10.20.10.0
Tue Jul 16 19:28:30 2013 us=861091 OpenVPN ROUTE: OpenVPN needs a gateway
parameter for a --route option and no default was specified by either
--route-gateway or --ifconfig options

openvpn server config:

port XXX
proto udp
dev tun
;dev-node tap0
ca /usr/local/etc/openvpn/XX.crt
cert /usr/local/etc/openvpn/XX.crt
key /usr/local/etc/openvpn/XX.key
dh /usr/local/etc/openvpn/dh2048.pem

server 10.20.10.0 255.255.255.0
push route 10.20.10.0 255.255.255.0

ifconfig-pool-persist /usr/local/etc/openvpn/ipp.txt 0

;duplicate-cn
keepalive 10 120
;cipher BF-CBC# Blowfish (default)
;cipher AES-256-CBC   # AES
cipher DES-EDE3-CBC  # Triple-DES
comp-lzo
user nobody
group nobody
persist-key
persist-tun
;status /var/log/openvpn-status.log
;log-append /var/log/openvpn.log
verb 10
mute 20
client-to-client
client-config-dir ccd route 10.20.10.1 255.255.255.0

ping-restart 0
tls-auth /usr/local/etc/openvpn/ta.key 0
plugin /usr/local/lib/openvpn/plugins/openvpn-plugin-auth-pam.so login
#tmp-dir /dev/shm

Almost same config on linux openvpn server runs. It's the server that
create correct route. But on freebsd I've 10.20.10.2 like automatic gw.

Any idea?

thanks!

Pol
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: openvpn routing

2013-07-16 Thread Pol Hallen
 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 unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


routing issues to freebsd.org

2013-07-08 Thread Paul Macdonald


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   8.8.178.110

traceroute to 8.8.178.110 (8.8.178.110), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
 1  -- 0.528 
ms  0.462 ms  0.428 ms
 2  490.net2.north.dc5.as20860.net (62.233.127.210)  0.267 ms  0.263 
ms  0.263 ms
 3  593.core1.thn.as20860.net (62.233.127.173)  111.922 ms  49.373 ms  
1.125 ms

 4  ae3-309.lon11.ip4.tinet.net (77.67.74.101)  1.080 ms  1.181 ms 1.081 ms
 5  xe-9-1-0.sjc10.ip4.tinet.net (89.149.184.53)  145.580 ms 145.746 ms
xe-8-1-0.sjc10.ip4.tinet.net (89.149.183.17)  145.216 ms
 6  213.200.66.238 (213.200.66.238)  145.702 ms  188.823 ms
ge-0-3-9.pat1.sjc.yahoo.com (216.115.96.10)  219.331 ms
 7  bgp1-ext.ysv.freebsd.org (216.115.101.227)  146.013 ms  146.385 ms
ae-5.pat2.sjc.yahoo.com (216.115.105.19)  145.653 ms
 8  * * bgp1-ext.ysv.freebsd.org (216.115.101.227)  146.519 ms
 9  * * *
10  * * *
11  * * *
12  * * *
13  * * *
14  * * *
15  * * *


Paul.

--
-
Paul Macdonald
IFDNRG Ltd
Web and video hosting
-
t: 0131 5548070
m: 07970339546
e: p...@ifdnrg.com
w: http://www.ifdnrg.com
-
IFDNRG
40 Maritime Street
Edinburgh
EH6 6SA

High Specification Dedicated Servers from £100.00pm


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: routing issues to freebsd.org

2013-07-08 Thread staticsafe
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.freebsd.org.513 IN  CNAME wfe0.ysv.freebsd.org.
 wfe0.ysv.freebsd.org.   1690IN  A   8.8.178.110
 

Perhaps an issue on your end (probably on the reverse route)? 

Traces look fine from multiple networks:
http://sprunge.us/JFeS

-- 
staticsafe
O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org
Please don't top post.
Please don't CC! I'm subscribed to whatever list I just posted on.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: routing issues to freebsd.org

2013-07-08 Thread Johan Hendriks

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.   1690IN  A   8.8.178.110

traceroute to 8.8.178.110 (8.8.178.110), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
 1  -- 0.528 
ms  0.462 ms  0.428 ms
 2  490.net2.north.dc5.as20860.net (62.233.127.210)  0.267 ms 0.263 
ms  0.263 ms
 3  593.core1.thn.as20860.net (62.233.127.173)  111.922 ms  49.373 ms  
1.125 ms
 4  ae3-309.lon11.ip4.tinet.net (77.67.74.101)  1.080 ms  1.181 ms 
1.081 ms

 5  xe-9-1-0.sjc10.ip4.tinet.net (89.149.184.53)  145.580 ms 145.746 ms
xe-8-1-0.sjc10.ip4.tinet.net (89.149.183.17)  145.216 ms
 6  213.200.66.238 (213.200.66.238)  145.702 ms  188.823 ms
ge-0-3-9.pat1.sjc.yahoo.com (216.115.96.10)  219.331 ms
 7  bgp1-ext.ysv.freebsd.org (216.115.101.227)  146.013 ms 146.385 ms
ae-5.pat2.sjc.yahoo.com (216.115.105.19)  145.653 ms
 8  * * bgp1-ext.ysv.freebsd.org (216.115.101.227)  146.519 ms
 9  * * *
10  * * *
11  * * *
12  * * *
13  * * *
14  * * *
15  * * *


Paul.


I noticed FreeBSD was not accessable this morning.
svnup gives me the following.
 svnup stable
svnup: connect failure: Connection refused

earlier i could not even open www.freebsd.org, so something is or was 
not right.

Now www.freebsd.org works again

gr
Johan Hendriks



___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: routing issues to freebsd.org

2013-07-08 Thread Erich Dollansky
Hi,

On Mon, 8 Jul 2013 08:01:09 -0400
staticsafe m...@staticsafe.ca 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
  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   8.8.178.110
  
 
 Perhaps an issue on your end (probably on the reverse route)? 

it was the same story in Indonesia.

Erich
 
 Traces look fine from multiple networks:
 http://sprunge.us/JFeS
 

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


/23 static routing question

2013-03-13 Thread Paul Macdonald


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

DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif Expire
default100.100.98.254 UGS 0 111301074   bge0
100.100.98.0   link#1 U   0 1470707172 bge0

But  i suspect i want:

Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif Expire
default100.100.98.254 UGS 0 111301074   bge0
100.100.98.0   link#1 U   0 1470707172 bge0
100.100.99.0   link#1 U   0 1470707172 bge0

or
100.100.98.0/23   link#1 U   0 1470707172 bge0


many thanks
Paul.











--
-
Paul Macdonald
IFDNRG Ltd
Web and video hosting
-
t: 0131 5548070
m: 07970339546
e: p...@ifdnrg.com
w: http://www.ifdnrg.com
-
IFDNRG
40 Maritime Street
Edinburgh
EH6 6SA

High Specification Dedicated Servers from £100.00pm


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


SOLVED /23 static routing question

2013-03-13 Thread Paul Macdonald

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


Currently netstat shows something like the below

DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use Netif Expire
default100.100.98.254 UGS 0 111301074 bge0
100.100.98.0   link#1 U   0 1470707172 bge0

But  i suspect i want:

Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use Netif Expire
default100.100.98.254 UGS 0 111301074 bge0
100.100.98.0   link#1 U   0 1470707172 bge0
100.100.99.0   link#1 U   0 1470707172 bge0

or
100.100.98.0/23   link#1 U   0 1470707172 bge0




restarting routing seemed to do this fine...:P

/ FreeBSD will automatically identify any hosts (//test0//in the 
example) on the local Ethernet and add a route for that host, directly 
to it over the Ethernet interface, //ed0//

/http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/network-routing.html
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: vlan routing

2013-03-10 Thread doug

On Sun, 10 Mar 2013, ??? ??? wrote:


2013/3/10  d...@safeport.com:

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 255.255.255.0
   route add -inet 134.217.128.117 134.217.128.1

ifconfig shows:

fxp0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
options=8VLAN_MTU
ether 00:d0:b7:56:cf:ab
inet 45.22.17.3 netmask 0xfc00 broadcast 45.22.19.255
inet 45.22.17.17 netmask 0x broadcast 45.22.17.17
inet 134.217.128.117 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 134.217.128.255
media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex)
status: active
bge0: flags=8802BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
options=9bRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM
ether 00:09:5b:60:e4:1f
media: Ethernet autoselect (none)
status: no carrier
vlan0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
ether 00:d0:b7:56:cf:ab
inet 134.217.128.117 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 134.217.128.255
media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex)
status: active
vlan: 95 parent interface: fxp0

Needless to say it does not work. The switch is programmed correctly (I am
told). My questions are (1) it seems like the option got applied to the
wrong interface; (2) what did I miss??

I also tried booting the system with IP of 134.217.128.117 but I did not get
the rc.conf macros correctly. I do know I can not route through the switch
without going the vlan commands.

_
Douglas Denault
http://www.safeport.com
d...@safeport.com
Voice: 301-217-9220
  Fax: 301-217-9277
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


I guess you shouldn't put the same IP address on two interfaces (vlan
and fxp0), you need to decide wherther you need tagged or untagged
vlan frames there and, depending on this decision put the IP address
on VLAN interface (tagged variant) or fxp0 (untagged one).

If i understand 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 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:

cloned_interfaces=vlan95
ifconfig_vlan95=inet 134.217.128.117/24 vlan 95 vlandev fxp0

for the interface to be created on reboot.
Hope this helps.


Thanks I will try

_
Douglas Denault
http://www.safeport.com
d...@safeport.com
Voice: 301-217-9220
  Fax: 301-217-9277
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


vlan routing

2013-03-09 Thread doug
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 255.255.255.0
   route add -inet 134.217.128.117 134.217.128.1

ifconfig shows:

fxp0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
options=8VLAN_MTU
ether 00:d0:b7:56:cf:ab
inet 45.22.17.3 netmask 0xfc00 broadcast 45.22.19.255
inet 45.22.17.17 netmask 0x broadcast 45.22.17.17
inet 134.217.128.117 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 134.217.128.255
media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex)
status: active
bge0: flags=8802BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
options=9bRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM
ether 00:09:5b:60:e4:1f
media: Ethernet autoselect (none)
status: no carrier
vlan0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
ether 00:d0:b7:56:cf:ab
inet 134.217.128.117 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 134.217.128.255
media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex)
status: active
vlan: 95 parent interface: fxp0

Needless to say it does not work. The switch is programmed correctly (I am 
told). My questions are (1) it seems like the option got applied to the wrong 
interface; (2) what did I miss??


I also tried booting the system with IP of 134.217.128.117 but I did not get the 
rc.conf macros correctly. I do know I can not route through the switch without 
going the vlan commands.


_
Douglas Denault
http://www.safeport.com
d...@safeport.com
Voice: 301-217-9220
  Fax: 301-217-9277
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: vlan routing

2013-03-09 Thread Виталий Туровец
2013/3/10  d...@safeport.com:
 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 255.255.255.0
route add -inet 134.217.128.117 134.217.128.1

 ifconfig shows:

 fxp0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
 options=8VLAN_MTU
 ether 00:d0:b7:56:cf:ab
 inet 45.22.17.3 netmask 0xfc00 broadcast 45.22.19.255
 inet 45.22.17.17 netmask 0x broadcast 45.22.17.17
 inet 134.217.128.117 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 134.217.128.255
 media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex)
 status: active
 bge0: flags=8802BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
 options=9bRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM
 ether 00:09:5b:60:e4:1f
 media: Ethernet autoselect (none)
 status: no carrier
 vlan0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
 ether 00:d0:b7:56:cf:ab
 inet 134.217.128.117 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 134.217.128.255
 media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex)
 status: active
 vlan: 95 parent interface: fxp0

 Needless to say it does not work. The switch is programmed correctly (I am
 told). My questions are (1) it seems like the option got applied to the
 wrong interface; (2) what did I miss??

 I also tried booting the system with IP of 134.217.128.117 but I did not get
 the rc.conf macros correctly. I do know I can not route through the switch
 without going the vlan commands.

 _
 Douglas Denault
 http://www.safeport.com
 d...@safeport.com
 Voice: 301-217-9220
   Fax: 301-217-9277
 ___
 freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

I guess you shouldn't put the same IP address on two interfaces (vlan
and fxp0), you need to decide wherther you need tagged or untagged
vlan frames there and, depending on this decision put the IP address
on VLAN interface (tagged variant) or fxp0 (untagged one).

If i understand 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 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:

cloned_interfaces=vlan95
ifconfig_vlan95=inet 134.217.128.117/24 vlan 95 vlandev fxp0

for the interface to be created on reboot.
Hope this helps.

--



~~~
WBR,
Vitaliy Turovets
NOC Lead @TV-Net ISP
NOC Lead @Service Outsourcing company
+38(093)265-70-55
VITU-RIPE
X-NCC-RegID: ua.tv
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Different take on old FAQ: multihoming and source-based routing

2012-09-01 Thread Ben Cottrell
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 pass along.
You can't send a packet with a Comcast source address to the ATT
default gateway and expect it to actually make it out onto the public
internet, etc.

Universally, the posts I've been finding that discuss this always
recommend creating multiple routing tables with options ROUTETABLES=...
which I wasn't willing to do, because my wild youthful kernel-recompiling
days are over -- these days I like the advantages that come with using a
pure GENERIC kernel. :-)

So, today I tried the following /etc/pf.conf:

 if = bge0
 v4_addr_1 = 173.228.91.225
 v4_net_1 = 173.228.91.0/24
 v4_gw_1 = 173.228.91.1
 v4_addr_2 = 50.193.24.82
 v4_net_2 = 50.193.24.80/28
 v4_gw_2 = 50.193.24.94
 
 pass out quick on $if route-to ($if $v4_gw_1) inet from $v4_addr_1 to 
 !$v4_net_1 no state
 pass out quick on $if route-to ($if $v4_gw_2) inet from $v4_addr_2 to 
 !$v4_net_2 no state
 #pass out quick on $if route-to ($if $v6_gw_1) inet6 from $v6_addr_1 to 
 !$v6_net_1 no state
 
 pass all no state

I guess my setup is a bit simpler than the norm because I only have
one physical interface, that both networks are on. But... by Jove,
it seems to be working!

Is there something I'm missing? Is this going to break in some subtle
edge case that I'm just not seeing?

If it really is this simple, why does everyone keep recommending
the options ROUTETABLES approach?

Thanks,

~Ben___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Problem with routing in VmWare VMS

2012-06-22 Thread UNIX developer @ Google.com
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  
 developeru...@gmail.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 data bytes
 ^C
 --- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics ---
 8 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss

 192.168.1.1 does not know how to find 192.168.2.1, so it can't respond to
 the ping. I bet it only has a default route to the internet. If you add a
 static route on 192.168.1.1 telling it that it can find 192.168.2.0/24 at
 192.168.1.10 it will probably work.


 On 192.168.1.1:

 route add -net 192.168.2.0/24 192.168.1.10

 Now the pings will work.


-- 
С уважением,
 UNIX  mailto:developeru...@gmail.com

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Problem with routing in VmWare VMS

2012-06-22 Thread Alexandre
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:13 PM, UNIX developer @ Google.com 
developeru...@gmail.com wrote:

 Ok, I understud!
 I remove from rc.conf this rows:
 static_routes=clnet
 route_clnet=-net 192.168.2.0/24 192.168.1.10

 new 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


 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 data bytes
 ^C
 --- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics ---
 8 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100.0% packet loss


 netstat -nr
 Routing tables

 Internet:
 DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif Expire
 default192.168.1.1UGS 0   38em0
 127.0.0.1  link#4 UH  00lo0
 192.168.1.0/24 link#1 U   0 1153em0
 192.168.1.10   link#1 UHS 06lo0
 192.168.2.0/24 link#2 U   00em1
 192.168.2.1link#2 UHS 06lo0

 Where more can be trouble?


 -
 Вы писали 22 июня 2012 г., 0:56:49:

  On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 15:59:36 -0500, UNIX developer @ Google.com
  developeru...@gmail.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 192.168.2.0/24 192.168.1.10

  You simply CANNOT do this. Traffic for 192.168.2.0/24 is bound to em1
 and
  cannot be changed. You setup a static route that basically says to find
  192.168.2.0/24, don't use em1 but instead ask 192.168.1.10 how to find
 it?

  This makes no sense at all.


 --
 С уважением,
  UNIX  mailto:developeru...@gmail.com

Hi,
Your problem, as Mark told you, is that you are buildinga gateway to
connect two networks on the same subnet.

Regards,
Alexandre
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Problem with routing in VmWare VMS

2012-06-21 Thread UNIX developer @ Google.com
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 from local network.
# ping -S 192.168.2.1 192.168.1.4
... no replays ...
many packets sent and 100% loss. Ok ^C.

My configs:
/ets/sysctl.conf
net.inet.ip.forwarding=1

/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 192.168.2.0/24 192.168.1.10

after booting in netstat is:
# netstat -nr
Routing tables

Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif Expire
default192.168.1.1UGS 02em0
127.0.0.1  link#4 UH  00lo0
192.168.1.0/24 link#1 U   0  120em0
192.168.1.10   link#1 UHS 00lo0
192.168.2.0/24 link#2 U   00em1
192.168.2.1link#2 UHS 00lo0

after /etc/rc.d/routing restart, I see:
# netstat -nr
Routing tables

Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif Expire
default192.168.1.1UGS 02em0
127.0.0.1  link#4 UH  00lo0
192.168.1.0/24 link#1 U   0  120em0
192.168.1.10   link#1 UHS 00lo0
192.168.2.0/24 192.168.1.10   U   00em1
192.168.2.1link#2 UHS 00lo0

What  I  need  to  do  for  other  VMs from routed network cat get the
external network?

Please help me solve this problem.
If need more information, please write for me!
Thanks!

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Problem with routing in VmWare VMS

2012-06-21 Thread Mark Felder
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 15:59:36 -0500, UNIX developer @ Google.com  
developeru...@gmail.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 192.168.2.0/24 192.168.1.10


You simply CANNOT do this. Traffic for 192.168.2.0/24 is bound to em1 and  
cannot be changed. You setup a static route that basically says to find  
192.168.2.0/24, don't use em1 but instead ask 192.168.1.10 how to find it?


This makes no sense at all.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Changes in Jails from FreeBSD 6 to FreeBSD 9 -- particularly, networking and routing

2012-04-15 Thread Chad Leigh Shire.Net LLC

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 c...@shire.net 
 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 was a documented behavior when I first started using jails ca. 2004 in 
FreeBSD 5.  Which is why I did it that way.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Changes in Jails from FreeBSD 6 to FreeBSD 9 -- particularly, networking and routing

2012-04-13 Thread Chad Leigh Shire.Net LLC
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 plus the Xen pci device.  There 
is one network device on the new server and it shares all addresses and the 
default route goes out it.

Because jails in FBSD 6 shared a network stack, I could have a public network 
x.x.x.0/24 and public address on the host machine, and a default route in that 
network as well, and use a 192.168.1.0/24 address aliased on the same network 
interface as the IP for my jail.  When doing that, from inside the jail, I 
could still reach the internet since it shared the route with the underlying  
machine.


That seems to have changed on FBSD 9.  Now, if I add in the 192.168.1.0/24 
address and run a jail on it, with the host machine in a public 
network/address/route as described above, from inside the jail I CANNOT reach 
the internet (it is not a resolver issue as services going to numeric addresses 
also fail).   However, the jail with the private 192.168.1.0/24 address CAN 
reach the host machines services even if it cannot get out onto the internet.  
And the HOST machine can access services on the jail running on the private IP 
address.

(The purpose of the jail is to provide services to other jails and hosts on the 
same public network [all VPS on the same public vlan] and NOT to provide 
services to the internet.  Things like local ldap or a local dns etc.  But the 
private jail still needs to reach the internet for things like name servers it 
needs to access that are outside of the public network the host lives in.  So I 
don't care if the internet itself can reach the private jail, just the local 
jails and hosts it co-exists with.   The answer shouldn't be natd etc (was not 
needed in 6.0 and I am not sharing one public address with a range of private 
jails behind it).



If I launch the jail with an address from the same public range as the host, it 
works fine.  The jail can access the internet fine and vice versa.  The host 
can access the jail services as well.

If I launch the jail with a private address, the jail cannot reach the 
internet.  It can reach the host in the public network, but not other machines 
in the same public network (ie, the other VPS I have running which are all in 
the same public network).

If I launch the jail with both a private address and a public address, it can 
reach the internet and other VPS on the same public network.  I may have to end 
up doing that and just not having any services run on the public IP but I'd 
rather avoid using up an address like that.

What changes happened in the jails between FBSD 6 and FBSD 9 that would give 
the symptoms I have been experiencing?

Thanks
Chad

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Changes in Jails from FreeBSD 6 to FreeBSD 9 -- particularly, networking and routing

2012-04-13 Thread Mark Felder

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 internet from  
the jails.


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).

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Changes in Jails from FreeBSD 6 to FreeBSD 9 -- particularly, networking and routing

2012-04-13 Thread Chad Leigh Shire.Net LLC

On Apr 13, 2012, at 1:50 PM, Mark Felder wrote:

 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 internet from the 
 jails.

correct.

(not that it did not matter I don't think is the private IP, host only exists 
and ALL IP exist on the host in addition to whatever 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 share the network stack under Jails v1 they share the 
routing tables.  It works.  Try it.

The question is, is it possible to do something similar with FreeBSD 9 jails 
(v2 I guess) without the overhead of running NAT?   The jail with the private 
IP *can* access the HOST's public services but not anyone else's

Chad

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Changes in Jails from FreeBSD 6 to FreeBSD 9 -- particularly, networking and routing

2012-04-13 Thread Mark Felder
On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:53:49 -0500, Chad Leigh Shire.Net LLC  
c...@shire.net 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 public IP on those packets. I have no idea how it processes  
the return traffic successfully, but that's a neat trick!. There is no  
possible way for this to work without NAT or whatever bug this is. If a  
Jail has a 192.168 IP all packets would leave with a source of 192.168.  
When Google or whoever on the internet gets your packets it would see  
192.168 and probably drop it because that's not a publicly routable  
network.


Without NAT it's impossible for any device anywhere on the planet to  
access the internet with an RFC 1918 IP address.


I urge you to share your experience on the freebsd-jail@ mailing list.  
Those guys might be able to lend some further insight. I bet the change  
came with the update to jails that allows multiple IPs.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


RIP routing protocol implementation is FreeBSD?

2012-01-30 Thread Kaya Saman

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 for the enable_routerd=YES and have used 
that before as default gateway of 'last-resort' with NAT but never RIP 
as don't wana use NAT in this case.



OpenBSD definitely has it but since am more familiar with FreeBSD I 
thought let's try here first :-)


Can anyone help me out?


Regards,


Kaya
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: RIP routing protocol implementation is FreeBSD?

2012-01-30 Thread Michael Sierchio
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Kaya Saman kayasa...@gmail.com 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.  It uses Routing Information Protocol, RIPv1 (RFC 1058),
 RIPv2 (RFC 1723), and Internet Router Discovery Protocol (RFC 1256) to
 maintain the kernel routing table.

router_enable=YES in /etc/rc.conf

this has nothing to do with NAT, btw.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: RIP routing protocol implementation is FreeBSD?

2012-01-30 Thread Eric Masson
Kaya Saman kayasa...@gmail.com 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

Éric Masson

-- 
 je crosspost sur fr rec moto pour ce triste modéle d'intolérance. [...]
 PS :Désolé mon logiciel de news ne permet pas les follow up et je n'en
 changerai certainement pas pour vous etre agréable.
 -+- CC in Guide du Neuneu Usenet - Bien configurer son incompétence -+-
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: RIP routing protocol implementation is FreeBSD?

2012-01-30 Thread Eric Masson
Eric Masson e...@free.fr 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?
 Fallait choisir le serveur bidule, c'est pour ça.
 -+- EJ in guide du linuxien pervers - Tout ça c'est de la bidouille -+-
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: RIP routing protocol implementation is FreeBSD?

2012-01-30 Thread Kaya Saman

On 01/30/2012 06:47 PM, Michael Sierchio wrote:

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Kaya Samankayasa...@gmail.com  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.  It uses Routing Information Protocol, RIPv1 (RFC 1058),
  RIPv2 (RFC 1723), and Internet Router Discovery Protocol (RFC 1256) to
  maintain the kernel routing table.

router_enable=YES in /etc/rc.conf

this has nothing to do with NAT, btw.


Thanks for the response. sorry I think I wasn't getting my point 
through clearly enough.


Am Cisco Engineer so know the difference between NAT, PAT, Static 
routing and dynamic routing ;-)


Yep I read about it in the handbook and yes I have used it before but 
not for dynamic routing.


The NAT'ing is what I did previously and was just mentioning what I 
'had' used before. which was everything but dynamic routing on 
FreeBSD 8.0 :-)



P.s. sorry if what I'm trying to say isn't getting out clearly enough :-)


Regards,


Kaya
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: RIP routing protocol implementation is FreeBSD?

2012-01-30 Thread Kaya Saman

On 01/30/2012 06:53 PM, Eric Masson wrote:

Kaya Samankayasa...@gmail.com  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

Éric Masson



Syntax blooper. It's sometimes hard to remember 'EVERYTHING' but 
once I see the /etc/rc.conf file I will know what is needed and how it's 
used :-)



Thanks for the correction though.


Regards,

Kaya
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: RIP routing protocol implementation is FreeBSD?

2012-01-30 Thread Kaya Saman

On 01/30/2012 07:11 PM, Eric Masson wrote:

Eric Massone...@free.fr  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=YES
nfs_server_flags=-a -t -n 4
nfs_server_enable=YES
rpc_statd_enable=YES
rpc_lockd_enable=YES
rpcbind_enable=YES
mountd_enable=YES
mountd_flags=-r
munin_node_enable=NO
zabbix_server_enable=NO
zabbix_agentd_enable=NO
icecast_enable=NO
darkice_enable=NO
fail2ban_enable=YES

implying:

routerd_enable=YES


:-) :-) :-)


Best regards,


Kaya
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: RIP routing protocol implementation is FreeBSD?

2012-01-30 Thread Kaya Saman

snip

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 isn't 
being advertised by FreeBSD.


My /etc/rc.conf file looks as such:

router_enable=YES
router_flags=-P ripv2 ripv2_out

From the manual I wasn't quite sure if I needed to put the above 
'router_flags' syntax or if:


ripv2
ripv2_out

should be put in the /etc/gateways file.

I tried Google'ing around but found almost no information on how to use 
the service.


However, on bootup the system claims: switch to trace file ripv2_out.


Running: sh ip route in the IOS only shows the C (connected routers) or 
S* (the gateway of last resort) but no dynamic RIP updates R.



Ok got something wrong here???


Can anyone assist.


Regards,

Kaya
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Displaying Routing Tables

2012-01-27 Thread Chris Maness
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 route command?

Thanks,
Chris Maness
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Displaying Routing Tables

2012-01-27 Thread Chris Maness
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Bernt Hansson b...@bananmonarki.se 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 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 route command?


 netstat -r

Thanks Guys,
Chris Maness
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: wireless and/or routing question

2012-01-13 Thread Waitman Gobble
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Da Rock 
freebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au wrote:

 On 01/13/12 17:11, Waitman Gobble wrote:

 On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Da Rock
 freebsd-questions@**herveybayaustralia.com.aufreebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au
  wrote:

  On 01/13/12 15:29, 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
 windows xp driver, and the Atheros with the ath driver that is installed
 with FreeBSD. (But BCM/ndis is noticeably much slower, Atheros - no
 green
 wireless light appears on netbook )

  i am getting the same results with either nic card, and i think i am
 just
 missing something simple.


 ath0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST   metric
 0 mtu

 2290
 ether 00:24:2b:ad:d6:5f
 nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL

 media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet autoselect mode 11g
 status: associated

  wlan0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST
 metric 0

 mtu 1500
 ether 00:24:2b:ad:d6:5f
 inet 10.0.0.21 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255
 nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL

 media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet OFDM/24Mbps mode 11g
 status: associated
 ssid CUDAPANG channel 6 (2437 MHz 11g) bssid 00:22:3f:9b:b8:aa
 regdomain 101 indoor ecm authmode OPEN privacy ON deftxkey 1
 wepkey 1:104-bit txpower 20 bmiss 7 scanvalid 60 bgscan
 bgscanintvl 300 bgscanidle 250 roam:rssi 7 roam:rate 5 protmode CTS
 wme burst

 connecting:

 ifconfig wlan0 create wlandev ath0
 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:

 p00ntang# ifconfig wlan0 up scan
 SSID/MESH IDBSSID  CHAN RATE   S:N INT CAPS
 CUDAPANG00:22:3f:9a:16:1b6   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
 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:
 DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif
 Expire
 default10.0.0.1   UGS 0 3338   ale0
 10.0.0.0/24link#2 U   0 2405   ale0
 10.0.0.20  link#2 UHS 00lo0
 10.0.0.21  link#9 UHS 02lo0
 127.0.0.1  link#8 UH  0   12lo0

 I do not see ath0' or wlan0 in the routing table under 'Netif', not
 sure
 if that's the problem :)


 p00ntang# less /etc/rc.conf
 hostname=p00ntang
 ifconfig_ale0= inet 10.0.0.20 netmask 255.255.255.0
 defaultrouter=10.0.0.1
 sshd_enable=YES
 ntpd_enable=YES
 # Set dumpdev to AUTO to enable crash dumps, NO to disable
 dumpdev=NO
 fusefs_enable=YES
 hald_enable=YES
 dbus_enable=YES
 moused_enable=YES
 snddetect_enable=YES
 mixer_enable=YES
 avahi_daemon_enable=YES
 ices0_enable=YES


 p00ntang# grep ath /boot/loader.conf
 if_ath_load=YES
 p00ntang# grep wlan /boot/loader.conf
 wlan_wep_load=YES
 wlan_ccmp_load=YES
 wlan_tkip_load=YES



 i've tried /etc/rc.d/routing restart.. no worky :)

 here's my wired connection ifconfig  --- wired connection works :)

 ale0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST   metric
 0 mtu
 1500
 options=c319aTXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,
 TSO4,WOL_MCAST,WOL_MAGIC,VLAN_HWTSO,LINKSTATE

 ether 00:23:5a:59:e1:e4
 inet 10.0.0.20 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255
 inet6 fe80::223:5aff:fe59:e1e4%ale0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2
 nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL

 media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTXfull-duplex)
 status: active




 any help/suggestions much appreciated!

  The solution is simple, but I know the frustration well.

 Your problem is that the route is looking to go through your wired
 network
 port, you started the network on the wired and then switched to wifi so
 the
 routing needs to change.

 Run as root: route change default -interface wlan0 will fix that
 temporarily. To fix it permanently (better for a laptop situation
 anyway, I
 feel), setup a lagg port including ale0 and wlan0. See
 http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/network-aggregation.htmlhttp://www.freebsd.org/doc/**handbook/network-aggregation.**html
 http://www.freebsd.org/**doc/handbook/network-**aggregation.htmlhttp://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/network-aggregation.html
 


 Good luck and happy networking

Re: wireless and/or routing question

2012-01-13 Thread Matthias Apitz
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 could do
 WPA, or at least I had crazy trouble getting things to work. But this
 learned attitude was probably around 2000, which was like a million years
 ago with dinosaurs and stuff. Time for me to finally get with it.
 
 ...

Concerning WEP ./. WPA: From the technical point it is clear, WPA is
more secure; but there are other aspects as well; we have had in Germany
cases where the WAN IP of the AP appeared as source addr of some kind of
crime (access to child porn or whatever) and the AP owner said: I'm
using WEP, it was not me, and someone highjacked my AP ... and he/she
went home as free person;

matthias
-- 
Matthias Apitz
e g...@unixarea.de - w http://www.unixarea.de/
UNIX since V7 on PDP-11, UNIX on mainframe since ESER 1055 (IBM /370)
UNIX on x86 since SVR4.2 UnixWare 2.1.2, FreeBSD since 2.2.5
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: wireless and/or routing question

2012-01-13 Thread Warren Block

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
windows xp driver, and the Atheros with the ath driver that is installed
with FreeBSD. (But BCM/ndis is noticeably much slower, Atheros - no green
wireless light appears on netbook )


On other models of the Aspire One (AOA150 and D250), adding some 
ath-specific settings to /boot/loader.conf enables the LED:


dev.ath.0.ledpin=3
dev.ath.0.softled=1
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: wireless and/or routing question

2012-01-13 Thread Waitman Gobble
On Jan 13, 2012 7:19 AM, Matthias Apitz g...@unixarea.de 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
  conservatism probably roots back to the time when not all devices
could do
  WPA, or at least I had crazy trouble getting things to work. But this
  learned attitude was probably around 2000, which was like a million
years
  ago with dinosaurs and stuff. Time for me to finally get with it.
 
  ...

 Concerning WEP ./. WPA: From the technical point it is clear, WPA is
 more secure; but there are other aspects as well; we have had in Germany
 cases where the WAN IP of the AP appeared as source addr of some kind of
 crime (access to child porn or whatever) and the AP owner said: I'm
 using WEP, it was not me, and someone highjacked my AP ... and he/she
 went home as free person;

matthias
 --
 Matthias Apitz
 e g...@unixarea.de - w http://www.unixarea.de/
 UNIX since V7 on PDP-11, UNIX on mainframe since ESER 1055 (IBM /370)
 UNIX on x86 since SVR4.2 UnixWare 2.1.2, FreeBSD since 2.2.5

thanks, going to try WPA this weekend.

My apartment is not so convenient for drive-by scanners (cant think of the
proper term at the moment) but i do have at least one neighbor who appears
potentially suspect.. like he might try to hack my ap for fun.

Waitman
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: wireless and/or routing question

2012-01-13 Thread Waitman Gobble
On Jan 13, 2012 7:38 AM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com 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 out. I can run the BCM with ndis and the
 windows xp driver, and the Atheros with the ath driver that is installed
 with FreeBSD. (But BCM/ndis is noticeably much slower, Atheros - no green
 wireless light appears on netbook )


 On other models of the Aspire One (AOA150 and D250), adding some
ath-specific settings to /boot/loader.conf enables the LED:

 dev.ath.0.ledpin=3
 dev.ath.0.softled=1

cool thanks ill try it out.

Waitman
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: wireless and/or routing question

2012-01-13 Thread Da Rock

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 out. I can run the BCM with ndis and 
the

windows xp driver, and the Atheros with the ath driver that is installed
with FreeBSD. (But BCM/ndis is noticeably much slower, Atheros - no 
green

wireless light appears on netbook )


On other models of the Aspire One (AOA150 and D250), adding some 
ath-specific settings to /boot/loader.conf enables the LED:


dev.ath.0.ledpin=3
dev.ath.0.softled=1

I'm curious as to how you can find out which pin to use in this setting?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: wireless and/or routing question UPDATE - WPA

2012-01-13 Thread Waitman Gobble
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Waitman Gobble gobble...@gmail.com wrote:


 On Jan 13, 2012 7:19 AM, Matthias Apitz g...@unixarea.de 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
   conservatism probably roots back to the time when not all devices
 could do
   WPA, or at least I had crazy trouble getting things to work. But this
   learned attitude was probably around 2000, which was like a million
 years
   ago with dinosaurs and stuff. Time for me to finally get with it.
  
   ...
 
  Concerning WEP ./. WPA: From the technical point it is clear, WPA is
  more secure; but there are other aspects as well; we have had in Germany
  cases where the WAN IP of the AP appeared as source addr of some kind of
  crime (access to child porn or whatever) and the AP owner said: I'm
  using WEP, it was not me, and someone highjacked my AP ... and he/she
  went home as free person;
 
 matthias
  --
  Matthias Apitz
  e g...@unixarea.de - w http://www.unixarea.de/
  UNIX since V7 on PDP-11, UNIX on mainframe since ESER 1055 (IBM /370)
  UNIX on x86 since SVR4.2 UnixWare 2.1.2, FreeBSD since 2.2.5

 thanks, going to try WPA this weekend.

 My apartment is not so convenient for drive-by scanners (cant think of the
 proper term at the moment) but i do have at least one neighbor who appears
 potentially suspect.. like he might try to hack my ap for fun.

 Waitman



Hi,

Today I picked up a D-Link DIR-815 and set it up for WPA with TKIP/PSK.
I believe i followed the instructions in the FreeBSD handbook. However, the
wpa_supplicant appears to hang indefinitely. If i control-c it barfs out an
error.

This clones ale0 wired NIC MAC to ath0 wireless NIC for lagg

ifconfig ath0 ether 00:23:5a:59:e1:e4
ifconfig wlan0 create wlandev ath0 ssid BOOTAY
ifconfig wlan0 up scan




here's the wpa_supplicant that's hanging:

wpa_supplicant -i wlan0 -c /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf




p00ntang# wpa_supplicant -i wlan0 -c /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf
Trying to associate with 1c:7e:e5:de:ed:52 (SSID='BOOTAY' freq=2452 MHz)
Associated with 1c:7e:e5:de:ed:52
WPA: Key negotiation completed with 1c:7e:e5:de:ed:52 [PTK=TKIP GTK=TKIP]
CTRL-EVENT-CONNECTED - Connection to 1c:7e:e5:de:ed:52 completed (auth)
[id=0 id_str=]


^CCTRL-EVENT-TERMINATING - signal 2 received
ioctl[SIOCS80211, op 20, len 7]: Can't assign requested address
ELOOP: remaining socket: sock=4 eloop_data=0x284081c0 user_data=0x28412080
handler=0x806d620


If I terminate with ampersand to run asynchronously it keeps running and i
have a wireless connection - it works.

p00ntang# wpa_supplicant -i wlan0 -c /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf 


I guess that makes sense but the handbook is not clear to me that it's to
be done this way. It's the first time i've set up WPA on FreeBSD so i'm not
100% about what to expect.

i am noticing messages about rekeying, so maybe the wpa-supplicant is
supposed to keep running.

here's /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf

network={
ssid=BOOTAY
psk=PASSWORD GOES HERE
}


here's the rest of the lagg to set wired/wireless interface with a failover
configuration. this is pretty clear in the handbook but i'll put it here in
case someone runs across the thread in the future.

ifconfig ale0 up
ifconfig wlan0 up
ifconfig lagg0 create
ifconfig lagg0 up laggproto failover laggport ale0 laggport wlan0
10.0.0.20/24



Thanks
Waitman
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: wireless and/or routing question UPDATE - WPA

2012-01-13 Thread Da Rock

On 01/14/12 16:28, Waitman Gobble wrote:

On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Waitman Gobblegobble...@gmail.com  wrote:


On Jan 13, 2012 7:19 AM, Matthias Apitzg...@unixarea.de  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
conservatism probably roots back to the time when not all devices

could do

WPA, or at least I had crazy trouble getting things to work. But this
learned attitude was probably around 2000, which was like a million

years

ago with dinosaurs and stuff. Time for me to finally get with it.

...

Concerning WEP ./. WPA: From the technical point it is clear, WPA is
more secure; but there are other aspects as well; we have had in Germany
cases where the WAN IP of the AP appeared as source addr of some kind of
crime (access to child porn or whatever) and the AP owner said: I'm
using WEP, it was not me, and someone highjacked my AP ... and he/she
went home as free person;

matthias
--
Matthias Apitz
eg...@unixarea.de  - w http://www.unixarea.de/
UNIX since V7 on PDP-11, UNIX on mainframe since ESER 1055 (IBM /370)
UNIX on x86 since SVR4.2 UnixWare 2.1.2, FreeBSD since 2.2.5

thanks, going to try WPA this weekend.

My apartment is not so convenient for drive-by scanners (cant think of the
proper term at the moment) but i do have at least one neighbor who appears
potentially suspect.. like he might try to hack my ap for fun.

Waitman



Hi,

Today I picked up a D-Link DIR-815 and set it up for WPA with TKIP/PSK.
I believe i followed the instructions in the FreeBSD handbook. However, the
wpa_supplicant appears to hang indefinitely. If i control-c it barfs out an
error.

This clones ale0 wired NIC MAC to ath0 wireless NIC for lagg

ifconfig ath0 ether 00:23:5a:59:e1:e4
ifconfig wlan0 create wlandev ath0 ssid BOOTAY
ifconfig wlan0 up scan




here's the wpa_supplicant that's hanging:

wpa_supplicant -i wlan0 -c /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf




p00ntang# wpa_supplicant -i wlan0 -c /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf
Trying to associate with 1c:7e:e5:de:ed:52 (SSID='BOOTAY' freq=2452 MHz)
Associated with 1c:7e:e5:de:ed:52
WPA: Key negotiation completed with 1c:7e:e5:de:ed:52 [PTK=TKIP GTK=TKIP]
CTRL-EVENT-CONNECTED - Connection to 1c:7e:e5:de:ed:52 completed (auth)
[id=0 id_str=]


^CCTRL-EVENT-TERMINATING - signal 2 received
ioctl[SIOCS80211, op 20, len 7]: Can't assign requested address
ELOOP: remaining socket: sock=4 eloop_data=0x284081c0 user_data=0x28412080
handler=0x806d620


If I terminate with ampersand to run asynchronously it keeps running and i
have a wireless connection - it works.

p00ntang# wpa_supplicant -i wlan0 -c /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf


I guess that makes sense but the handbook is not clear to me that it's to
be done this way. It's the first time i've set up WPA on FreeBSD so i'm not
100% about what to expect.

i am noticing messages about rekeying, so maybe the wpa-supplicant is
supposed to keep running.

here's /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf

network={
 ssid=BOOTAY
 psk=PASSWORD GOES HERE
}


here's the rest of the lagg to set wired/wireless interface with a failover
configuration. this is pretty clear in the handbook but i'll put it here in
case someone runs across the thread in the future.

ifconfig ale0 up
ifconfig wlan0 up
ifconfig lagg0 create
ifconfig lagg0 up laggproto failover laggport ale0 laggport wlan0
10.0.0.20/24

Just stick the config in rc.conf and make sure you include WPA in the 
wlan0 definition. It will just work then.


For reference, to run wpa_supplicant from the cli you usually add -B 
in the flags to daemonise it, and run in the background; otherwise it 
will run in the foreground for debugging purposes.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


wireless and/or routing question

2012-01-12 Thread Waitman Gobble
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
windows xp driver, and the Atheros with the ath driver that is installed
with FreeBSD. (But BCM/ndis is noticeably much slower, Atheros - no green
wireless light appears on netbook )

 i am getting the same results with either nic card, and i think i am just
missing something simple.


ath0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 2290
ether 00:24:2b:ad:d6:5f
nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL
media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet autoselect mode 11g
status: associated

 wlan0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
ether 00:24:2b:ad:d6:5f
inet 10.0.0.21 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255
nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL
media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet OFDM/24Mbps mode 11g
status: associated
ssid CUDAPANG channel 6 (2437 MHz 11g) bssid 00:22:3f:9b:b8:aa
regdomain 101 indoor ecm authmode OPEN privacy ON deftxkey 1
wepkey 1:104-bit txpower 20 bmiss 7 scanvalid 60 bgscan
bgscanintvl 300 bgscanidle 250 roam:rssi 7 roam:rate 5 protmode CTS
wme burst

connecting:

ifconfig wlan0 create wlandev ath0
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:

p00ntang# ifconfig wlan0 up scan
SSID/MESH IDBSSID  CHAN RATE   S:N INT CAPS
CUDAPANG00:22:3f:9a:16:1b6   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
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:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif Expire
default10.0.0.1   UGS 0 3338   ale0
10.0.0.0/24link#2 U   0 2405   ale0
10.0.0.20  link#2 UHS 00lo0
10.0.0.21  link#9 UHS 02lo0
127.0.0.1  link#8 UH  0   12lo0

I do not see ath0' or wlan0 in the routing table under 'Netif', not sure
if that's the problem :)


p00ntang# less /etc/rc.conf
hostname=p00ntang
ifconfig_ale0= inet 10.0.0.20 netmask 255.255.255.0
defaultrouter=10.0.0.1
sshd_enable=YES
ntpd_enable=YES
# Set dumpdev to AUTO to enable crash dumps, NO to disable
dumpdev=NO
fusefs_enable=YES
hald_enable=YES
dbus_enable=YES
moused_enable=YES
snddetect_enable=YES
mixer_enable=YES
avahi_daemon_enable=YES
ices0_enable=YES


p00ntang# grep ath /boot/loader.conf
if_ath_load=YES
p00ntang# grep wlan /boot/loader.conf
wlan_wep_load=YES
wlan_ccmp_load=YES
wlan_tkip_load=YES



i've tried /etc/rc.d/routing restart.. no worky :)

here's my wired connection ifconfig  --- wired connection works :)

ale0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
options=c319aTXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,WOL_MCAST,WOL_MAGIC,VLAN_HWTSO,LINKSTATE
ether 00:23:5a:59:e1:e4
inet 10.0.0.20 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255
inet6 fe80::223:5aff:fe59:e1e4%ale0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2
nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL
media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex)
status: active




any help/suggestions much appreciated!


Thank you,

Waitman Gobble
San Jose California USA
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: wireless and/or routing question

2012-01-12 Thread Waitman Gobble
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:29 PM, Waitman Gobble gobble...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello,

 I am running 9.0-RC3 i386 on an Acer Aspire One D150. i am having trouble
 with the wireless setup.


Hi, update-

i noticed if i start routed it complains...
p00ntang# routed
p00ntang# routed: wlan0 (10.0.0.21/24) is duplicated by ale0 (10.0.0.20/24)


so i tried shutting off ale0... now i can ping gw but still no luck getting
outside. :(

p00ntang# ifconfig ale0 down
p00ntang# ping 10.0.0.1
PING 10.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=3.381 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=2.499 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=2.893 ms
^C
--- 10.0.0.1 ping statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 2.499/2.924/3.381/0.361 ms
p00ntang# ping google.com
PING google.com (74.125.224.116): 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
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: wireless and/or routing question

2012-01-12 Thread Da Rock

On 01/13/12 15:29, 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
windows xp driver, and the Atheros with the ath driver that is installed
with FreeBSD. (But BCM/ndis is noticeably much slower, Atheros - no green
wireless light appears on netbook )

  i am getting the same results with either nic card, and i think i am just
missing something simple.


ath0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST  metric 0 mtu 2290
ether 00:24:2b:ad:d6:5f
nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL
media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet autoselect mode 11g
status: associated

  wlan0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST  metric 0 mtu 1500
ether 00:24:2b:ad:d6:5f
inet 10.0.0.21 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255
nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL
media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet OFDM/24Mbps mode 11g
status: associated
ssid CUDAPANG channel 6 (2437 MHz 11g) bssid 00:22:3f:9b:b8:aa
regdomain 101 indoor ecm authmode OPEN privacy ON deftxkey 1
wepkey 1:104-bit txpower 20 bmiss 7 scanvalid 60 bgscan
bgscanintvl 300 bgscanidle 250 roam:rssi 7 roam:rate 5 protmode CTS
wme burst

connecting:

ifconfig wlan0 create wlandev ath0
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:

p00ntang# ifconfig wlan0 up scan
SSID/MESH IDBSSID  CHAN RATE   S:N INT CAPS
CUDAPANG00:22:3f:9a:16:1b6   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
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:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif Expire
default10.0.0.1   UGS 0 3338   ale0
10.0.0.0/24link#2 U   0 2405   ale0
10.0.0.20  link#2 UHS 00lo0
10.0.0.21  link#9 UHS 02lo0
127.0.0.1  link#8 UH  0   12lo0

I do not see ath0' or wlan0 in the routing table under 'Netif', not sure
if that's the problem :)


p00ntang# less /etc/rc.conf
hostname=p00ntang
ifconfig_ale0= inet 10.0.0.20 netmask 255.255.255.0
defaultrouter=10.0.0.1
sshd_enable=YES
ntpd_enable=YES
# Set dumpdev to AUTO to enable crash dumps, NO to disable
dumpdev=NO
fusefs_enable=YES
hald_enable=YES
dbus_enable=YES
moused_enable=YES
snddetect_enable=YES
mixer_enable=YES
avahi_daemon_enable=YES
ices0_enable=YES


p00ntang# grep ath /boot/loader.conf
if_ath_load=YES
p00ntang# grep wlan /boot/loader.conf
wlan_wep_load=YES
wlan_ccmp_load=YES
wlan_tkip_load=YES



i've tried /etc/rc.d/routing restart.. no worky :)

here's my wired connection ifconfig  --- wired connection works :)

ale0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST  metric 0 mtu 1500
options=c319aTXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,WOL_MCAST,WOL_MAGIC,VLAN_HWTSO,LINKSTATE
ether 00:23:5a:59:e1:e4
inet 10.0.0.20 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255
inet6 fe80::223:5aff:fe59:e1e4%ale0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2
nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL
media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTXfull-duplex)
status: active




any help/suggestions much appreciated!

The solution is simple, but I know the frustration well.

Your problem is that the route is looking to go through your wired 
network port, you started the network on the wired and then switched to 
wifi so the routing needs to change.


Run as root: route change default -interface wlan0 will fix that 
temporarily. To fix it permanently (better for a laptop situation 
anyway, I feel), setup a lagg port including ale0 and wlan0. See 
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/network-aggregation.html


Good luck and happy networking!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: wireless and/or routing question

2012-01-12 Thread Waitman Gobble
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Da Rock 
freebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au wrote:

 On 01/13/12 15:29, 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
 windows xp driver, and the Atheros with the ath driver that is installed
 with FreeBSD. (But BCM/ndis is noticeably much slower, Atheros - no green
 wireless light appears on netbook )

  i am getting the same results with either nic card, and i think i am just
 missing something simple.


 ath0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,**RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST  metric 0 mtu
 2290
 ether 00:24:2b:ad:d6:5f
 nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,**IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL
 media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet autoselect mode 11g
 status: associated

  wlan0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,**RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST  metric 0
 mtu 1500
 ether 00:24:2b:ad:d6:5f
 inet 10.0.0.21 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255
 nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,**IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL
 media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet OFDM/24Mbps mode 11g
 status: associated
 ssid CUDAPANG channel 6 (2437 MHz 11g) bssid 00:22:3f:9b:b8:aa
 regdomain 101 indoor ecm authmode OPEN privacy ON deftxkey 1
 wepkey 1:104-bit txpower 20 bmiss 7 scanvalid 60 bgscan
 bgscanintvl 300 bgscanidle 250 roam:rssi 7 roam:rate 5 protmode CTS
 wme burst

 connecting:

 ifconfig wlan0 create wlandev ath0
 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:

 p00ntang# ifconfig wlan0 up scan
 SSID/MESH IDBSSID  CHAN RATE   S:N INT CAPS
 CUDAPANG00:22:3f:9a:16:1b6   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
 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:
 DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif Expire
 default10.0.0.1   UGS 0 3338   ale0
 10.0.0.0/24link#2 U   0 2405   ale0
 10.0.0.20  link#2 UHS 00lo0
 10.0.0.21  link#9 UHS 02lo0
 127.0.0.1  link#8 UH  0   12lo0

 I do not see ath0' or wlan0 in the routing table under 'Netif', not sure
 if that's the problem :)


 p00ntang# less /etc/rc.conf
 hostname=p00ntang
 ifconfig_ale0= inet 10.0.0.20 netmask 255.255.255.0
 defaultrouter=10.0.0.1
 sshd_enable=YES
 ntpd_enable=YES
 # Set dumpdev to AUTO to enable crash dumps, NO to disable
 dumpdev=NO
 fusefs_enable=YES
 hald_enable=YES
 dbus_enable=YES
 moused_enable=YES
 snddetect_enable=YES
 mixer_enable=YES
 avahi_daemon_enable=YES
 ices0_enable=YES


 p00ntang# grep ath /boot/loader.conf
 if_ath_load=YES
 p00ntang# grep wlan /boot/loader.conf
 wlan_wep_load=YES
 wlan_ccmp_load=YES
 wlan_tkip_load=YES



 i've tried /etc/rc.d/routing restart.. no worky :)

 here's my wired connection ifconfig  --- wired connection works :)

 ale0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,**RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST  metric 0 mtu
 1500
 options=c319aTXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,**VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,**
 TSO4,WOL_MCAST,WOL_MAGIC,VLAN_**HWTSO,LINKSTATE
 ether 00:23:5a:59:e1:e4
 inet 10.0.0.20 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255
 inet6 fe80::223:5aff:fe59:e1e4%ale0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2
 nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,**IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL
 media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTXfull-duplex)
 status: active




 any help/suggestions much appreciated!

 The solution is simple, but I know the frustration well.

 Your problem is that the route is looking to go through your wired network
 port, you started the network on the wired and then switched to wifi so the
 routing needs to change.

 Run as root: route change default -interface wlan0 will fix that
 temporarily. To fix it permanently (better for a laptop situation anyway, I
 feel), setup a lagg port including ale0 and wlan0. See
 http://www.freebsd.org/doc/**handbook/network-aggregation.**htmlhttp://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/network-aggregation.html

 Good luck and happy networking!
 __**_
 freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/**mailman/listinfo/freebsd-**questionshttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-**
 unsubscr...@freebsd.org freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org



Thanks, that's very helpful - seems

Re: wireless and/or routing question

2012-01-12 Thread Da Rock

On 01/13/12 17:11, Waitman Gobble wrote:

On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Da Rock
freebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au  wrote:


On 01/13/12 15:29, 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
windows xp driver, and the Atheros with the ath driver that is installed
with FreeBSD. (But BCM/ndis is noticeably much slower, Atheros - no green
wireless light appears on netbook )

  i am getting the same results with either nic card, and i think i am just
missing something simple.


ath0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,**RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST   metric 0 mtu
2290
ether 00:24:2b:ad:d6:5f
nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,**IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL
media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet autoselect mode 11g
status: associated

  wlan0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,**RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST   metric 0
mtu 1500
ether 00:24:2b:ad:d6:5f
inet 10.0.0.21 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255
nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,**IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL
media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet OFDM/24Mbps mode 11g
status: associated
ssid CUDAPANG channel 6 (2437 MHz 11g) bssid 00:22:3f:9b:b8:aa
regdomain 101 indoor ecm authmode OPEN privacy ON deftxkey 1
wepkey 1:104-bit txpower 20 bmiss 7 scanvalid 60 bgscan
bgscanintvl 300 bgscanidle 250 roam:rssi 7 roam:rate 5 protmode CTS
wme burst

connecting:

ifconfig wlan0 create wlandev ath0
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:

p00ntang# ifconfig wlan0 up scan
SSID/MESH IDBSSID  CHAN RATE   S:N INT CAPS
CUDAPANG00:22:3f:9a:16:1b6   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
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:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif Expire
default10.0.0.1   UGS 0 3338   ale0
10.0.0.0/24link#2 U   0 2405   ale0
10.0.0.20  link#2 UHS 00lo0
10.0.0.21  link#9 UHS 02lo0
127.0.0.1  link#8 UH  0   12lo0

I do not see ath0' or wlan0 in the routing table under 'Netif', not sure
if that's the problem :)


p00ntang# less /etc/rc.conf
hostname=p00ntang
ifconfig_ale0= inet 10.0.0.20 netmask 255.255.255.0
defaultrouter=10.0.0.1
sshd_enable=YES
ntpd_enable=YES
# Set dumpdev to AUTO to enable crash dumps, NO to disable
dumpdev=NO
fusefs_enable=YES
hald_enable=YES
dbus_enable=YES
moused_enable=YES
snddetect_enable=YES
mixer_enable=YES
avahi_daemon_enable=YES
ices0_enable=YES


p00ntang# grep ath /boot/loader.conf
if_ath_load=YES
p00ntang# grep wlan /boot/loader.conf
wlan_wep_load=YES
wlan_ccmp_load=YES
wlan_tkip_load=YES



i've tried /etc/rc.d/routing restart.. no worky :)

here's my wired connection ifconfig  --- wired connection works :)

ale0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,**RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST   metric 0 mtu
1500
options=c319aTXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,**VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,**
TSO4,WOL_MCAST,WOL_MAGIC,VLAN_**HWTSO,LINKSTATE
ether 00:23:5a:59:e1:e4
inet 10.0.0.20 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255
inet6 fe80::223:5aff:fe59:e1e4%ale0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2
nd6 options=29PERFORMNUD,**IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL
media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTXfull-duplex)
status: active




any help/suggestions much appreciated!


The solution is simple, but I know the frustration well.

Your problem is that the route is looking to go through your wired network
port, you started the network on the wired and then switched to wifi so the
routing needs to change.

Run as root: route change default -interface wlan0 will fix that
temporarily. To fix it permanently (better for a laptop situation anyway, I
feel), setup a lagg port including ale0 and wlan0. See
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/**handbook/network-aggregation.**htmlhttp://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/network-aggregation.html

Good luck and happy networking!
__**_
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/**mailman/listinfo/freebsd-**questionshttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-**
unsubscr...@freebsd.orgfreebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org



Thanks, that's very helpful - seems to be the issue. Getting rid of my ale0
ifconfig spec

Routing Woes

2011-09-03 Thread Monkeyfoahead
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 
connected to a Comcast modem. The other is my apartment's wifi. I desire to use 
the wifi for torrenting and my connection for http,ftp, and ssh access. The 
proper ports have been forwarded to the freebsd server from the firewall on the 
Comcast connection.  My problem is when the default route is set to go over the 
wifi, i cannot access the server from the comcast modem address. When my 
default route is set to go over the modem, my server is accessible to the 
outside world.

Due to the nature of the torrent-dameon i am using. I must have the default 
route go over the wifi connection. Is there a route i can add that will fix my 
problem? 

Thanks for your help.
Jordan


ifconfig output:
fxp0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
options=2009RXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,WOL_MAGIC
ether 00:12:3f:a4:59:ef
inet 10.0.1.5 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.1.255
media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex)
status: active
lo0: flags=8049UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 16384
options=3RXCSUM,TXCSUM
inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x4 
inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff00 
nd6 options=3PERFORMNUD,ACCEPT_RTADV
wlan0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
ether 00:1e:e5:ff:1d:49
inet 1.1.3.153 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 1.1.3.255
media: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Ethernet DS/11Mbps mode 11g
status: associated
ssid Elms D South channel 9 (2452 MHz 11g) bssid 00:16:01:59:e4:c0
regdomain FCC indoor ecm authmode OPEN privacy ON deftxkey 1
wepkey 1:40-bit txpower 27 bmiss 7 scanvalid 450 bgscan
bgscanintvl 300 bgscanidle 250 roam:rssi 7 roam:rate 5 protmode CTS
wme burst roaming MANUAL

The boxes routing table is as follows:

Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif Expire
default1.1.3.1UGS  2245   253352  wlan0 
 Wireless 
1.1.3.0/24 link#5 U   1  421  wlan0
1.1.3.153  link#5 UHS 00lo0
10.0.1.0/24link#2 U   2 6098   fxp0
10.0.1.5   link#2 UHS 00lo0 
- Comcast
127.0.0.1  link#4 UH  0   34lo0

Internet6:
Destination   Gateway   Flags  
Netif Expire
::1   ::1   UH  lo0
fe80::%lo0/64 link#4U   lo0
fe80::1%lo0   link#4UHS lo0
ff01:4::/32   fe80::1%lo0   U   lo0
ff02::%lo0/32 fe80::1%lo0   U   lo0


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Routing Woes

2011-09-03 Thread Adam Vande More
On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Monkeyfoahead jordanbha...@gmail.comwrote:

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 connected to a Comcast modem. The other is my apartment's
 wifi. I desire to use the wifi for torrenting and my connection for
 http,ftp, and ssh access. The proper ports have been forwarded to the
 freebsd server from the firewall on the Comcast connection.  My problem is
 when the default route is set to go over the wifi, i cannot access the
 server from the comcast modem address. When my default route is set to go
 over the modem, my server is accessible to the outside world.

 Due to the nature of the torrent-dameon i am using. I must have the default
 route go over the wifi connection. Is there a route i can add that will fix
 my problem?


I believe you'll want to use fib's eg setfib(1) and assign your torrent
client to use the fib associated with your wifi.


-- 
Adam Vande More
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


IPSec routing (long post)

2011-05-21 Thread jhall

Ladies and Gentlemen,

First, please excuse this extremely long post.  I have tried to include 
all of the information I thought was relevant, and may have included too 
much. 

I have established an IPSec connection to our vendor using transport mode. 
 However, I am having problems successfully 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. 

My external IP address is 1.2.3.4 and the vendor's is 5.6.7.8.  The 
default gateway on my system is 1.2.3.5.  My internal IP address range is 
192.168.1.0/24 and the vendor's is 192.168.2.0//24. 

Following is what I have done/tried.

Following are my entries in racoon.conf.  I have not changed any of the 
default settings for padding/spacing/etc. 

remote 5.6.7.8
{
exchange_mode main,aggressive;
doi ipsec_doi;
situation identity_only;

my_identifier address 1.2.3.4;
proposal_check obey;# obey, strict, or claim
lifetime time 86400 secs;
proposal {
encryption_algorithm 3des;
hash_algorithm sha1;
authentication_method pre_shared_key;
dh_group 2;
}
}

sainfo address 192.168.1.024 any address 192.168.2.0/24 any
{
pfs_group 2;
encryption_algorithm 3des;
lifetime time 3600 secs;
authentication_algorithm hmac_sha1;
compression_algorithm deflate;
}

sainfo address 192.168.2.0/24 any address 192.168.1.024 any
{
pfs_group 2;
encryption_algorithm 3des;
lifetime time 3600 secs;
authentication_algorithm hmac_sha1;
compression_algorithm deflate;
}

sainfo address 1.2.3.4/32 any address 192.168.2.0/24 any
{
pfs_group 2;
encryption_algorithm 3des;
lifetime time 3600 secs;
authentication_algorithm hmac_sha1;
compression_algorithm deflate;
}

sainfo address 192.168.2.0/24 any address 65.1117.48.155/32 any
{
pfs_group 2;
encryption_algorithm 3des;
lifetime time 3600 secs;
authentication_algorithm hmac_sha1;
compression_algorithm deflate;
}

sainfo address 1.2.3.4/32 any address 5.6.7.8 any
{
pfs_group 2;
encryption_algorithm 3des;
lifetime time 3600 secs;
authentication_algorithm hmac_sha1;
compression_algorithm deflate;

sainfo address 1.2.3.4/32 any address 5.6.7.8 any
{
pfs_group 2;
encryption_algorithm 3des;
lifetime time 3600 secs;
authentication_algorithm hmac_sha1;
compression_algorithm deflate;
}

sainfo address 5.6.7.8/32 any address 1.2.3.4/32 any
{
pfs_group 2;
encryption_algorithm 3des;
lifetime time 3600 secs;
authentication_algorithm hmac_sha1;
compression_algorithm deflate;
}

sainfo address 192.168.1.024 any address 5.6.7.8 any
{
pfs_group 2;
encryption_algorithm 3des;
lifetime time 3600 secs;
authentication_algorithm hmac_sha1;
compression_algorithm deflate;
}

sainfo address 192.168.1.024 any address 5.6.7.8 any
{
pfs_group 2;
encryption_algorithm 3des;
lifetime time 3600 secs;
authentication_algorithm hmac_sha1;
compression_algorithm deflate;
}

The following entries are made using setkey.

flush;
spdflush;
spdadd 1.2.3.4/32 5.6.7.8/32  any -P out ipsec 
esp/tunnel/1.2.3.4-5.6.7.8/require; 
spdadd 192.168.1.0/24 192.168.2.0//24 any -P out ipsec 
esp/transport/1.2.3.4-5.6.7.8/require; 
spdadd 1.2.3.4/32 192.168.2.0//24 any -P out ipsec 
esp/transport/1.2.3.4-5.6.7.8/require; 
spdadd 192.168.1.0/24 5.6.7.8 any -P out ipsec 
esp/transport/1.2.3.4-5.6.7.8/require; 
spdadd 5.6.7.8/32 1.2.3.4/32 any -P in ipsec 
esp/tunnel/5.6.7.8-1.2.3.4/require; 
spdadd 192.168.2.0//24 192.168.1.0/24 any -P in ipsec 
esp/transport/5.6.7.8-1.2.3.4/require; 
spdadd 192.168.2.0//24 1.2.3.4/32 any -P in ipsec 
esp/transport/5.6.7.8-1.2.3.4/require; 
spdadd 5.6.7.8/32 192.168.1.0/24 any -P in ipsec 
esp/transport/5.6.7.8-1.2.3.4/require; 

Using setkey -DP all of the entries have been made.

I see the following in the log which indicates, to me anyway, the proper 
policy has been applied. 

2011-05-21 10:10:29: DEBUG: suitable inbound SP found: 192.168.2.0/24[0] 
1.2.3.4/32[0] proto=any dir=in. 
2011-05-21 10:10:29: DEBUG: new acquire 1.2.3.4/32[0] 192.168.2.0/24[0] 
proto=any dir=out 
2011-05-21 10:10:29: DEBUG: configuration found for 5.6.7.8.
2011-05-21 10:10:29: DEBUG: getsainfo params: loc='1.2.3.4', 
rmt='192.168.2.0/24', peer='NULL', id=0 
2011-05-21 10:10:29: DEBUG: getsainfo pass #2
2011-05-21 10:10:29: DEBUG: evaluating sainfo: loc='ANONYMOUS', 
rmt='ANONYMOUS', peer='ANY', id=0 
2011-05-21 10:10:29: DEBUG: evaluating sainfo: loc='192.168.1.0/24', 
rmt

Re: Re: IPSec routing (long post)

2011-05-21 Thread jhall

From : claudiu vasadi claudiu.vas...@gmail.com
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.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/ipsec.html
 - pls post your ifconfig  interface settings
 - you can use tcpdump to sniff traffic off of your real network
 interface (tcpdump (-v) -i interface host vendor_ext_IP and dst
 local_ext_IP)
 - do you have options IPSEC and device crypto in your kernel ?

My understanding is the handbook was using tunnel mode to connect the 
networks, and I am using transport mode.  Are these the same, and I am 
misunderstanding what I am reading. 

Jay

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: OpenVPN routing

2011-04-27 Thread Maciej Milewski
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 default10.0.1.1   UGSc   610   
  en1 10.0.1/24  link#5 UCS 30
 en1 10.0.1.1   0:23:12:f7:37:cc   UHLWI  89 1268
 en1   1142 10.0.1.2   0:14:d1:1f:79:1b   UHLWI   0 
 837 en1183 10.0.1.198 127.0.0.1  UHS 0
0 lo0 10.0.1.255 ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff  UHLWbI  0  
  6 en1 127127.0.0.1  UCS 0
0 lo0 127.0.0.1  127.0.0.1  UH  2  
 75 lo0 169.254link#5 UCS 0   
 0 en1 172.16.87/24   link#7 UC  10
  vmnet1 172.16.87.255  ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff  UHLWbI  03 
 vmnet1 192.168.46 192.168.47.2   UGSc00   
 tap0 192.168.47 link#10UC  10   
 tap0 192.168.47.2   link#10UHLWI   10   
 tap0

And this is with tap interfaces - I think it won't work.
Don't use bridge mode if you have two subnets of /24. I saw examples that it 
would work only if you make one subnet accessible to both: local network and 
vpn network. Change your configuration from bridged to routed or change your 
vpn addressing space.
If you'll go the routed way you may try this:
http://www.secure-computing.net/wiki/index.php/FreeBSD_OpenVPN_Server/Routed

-- 
Maciej Milewski
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: OpenVPN routing

2011-04-26 Thread Maciej Milewski
On Tuesday 26 of April 2011 04:38:29, Ryan Coleman wrote:
 Also:
 [root@nbserver1 /usr/home/ryanc]# ifconfig
 em0: flags=8943UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0
 mtu 1500 options=98VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM
 ether 00:14:22:15:dc:65
 inet 192.168.46.2 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.46.255
 media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT full-duplex)
 status: active
 tap0: flags=8943UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0
 mtu 1500 options=8LINKSTATE
 ether 00:bd:7e:86:1d:00
 inet 192.168.47.1 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.47.255
 Opened by PID 10341
 bridge0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu
 1500 ether 46:e1:75:c6:a3:a7
 inet 192.168.47.254 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.47.255
 id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15
 maxage 20 holdcnt 6 proto rstp maxaddr 100 timeout 1200
 root id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 ifcost 0 port 0
 member: tap0 flags=143LEARNING,DISCOVER,AUTOEDGE,AUTOPTP
 ifmaxaddr 0 port 5 priority 128 path cost 200
 member: em0 flags=143LEARNING,DISCOVER,AUTOEDGE,AUTOPTP
 ifmaxaddr 0 port 1 priority 128 path cost 2
 
 On Apr 25, 2011, at 9:36 PM, Ryan Coleman wrote:
  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:
...
  server 192.168.47.0 255.255.255.0
From the man openvpn(8):
  Don't  use --server if you are ethernet bridging.  Use --server-
  bridge instead.
And additionally bridging means that you have to divide your local 
subnet(192.168.46.0/24) into two parts. 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 subnet 
192.168.47.0/24?


[1] http://openvpn.net/index.php/open-source/documentation/miscellaneous/76-
ethernet-bridging.html

Maciej Milewski
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: OpenVPN routing

2011-04-26 Thread Nathan Vidican
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Ryan Coleman ryan.cole...@cwis.biz wrote:

 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 keys/server.crt
 key keys/server.key # This file should be kept secret
 dh keys/dh1024.pem
 # Don't put this in the keys directory unless user nobody can read it
 crl-verify keys/crl.pem
 #Make sure this is your tunnel address pool
 server 192.168.47.0 255.255.255.0
 ifconfig-pool-persist ipp.txt
 #This is the route to push to the client, add more if necessary
 #push route 192.168.46.254 255.255.255.0
 push route 192.168.47.0 255.255.255.0
 push dhcp-option DNS 192.168.45.10
 keepalive 10 120
 cipher BF-CBC #Blowfish encryption
 comp-lzo
 #fragment
 user nobody
 group nobody
 persist-key
 persist-tun
 status openvpn-status.log
 verb 6
 mute 5


 client.conf:
 #Begin client.conf
 client
 dev tap
 proto 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 keys/ryanc.crt
 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 - 
 which we have another 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, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Do you have packet forwarding (routing /gateway) enabled? An
all-important, yet sometimes forgotten step...
check if:

   sysctl net.inet.ip.forwarding

returns 1 for enabled or not. You can enable it right away by setting
to 1, and/or view the instructions in the handbook for greater detail
including how to set as a startup option as well:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/network-routing.html

--
Nathan Vidican
nat...@vidican.com
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: OpenVPN routing

2011-04-26 Thread Ryan Coleman

On Apr 26, 2011, at 8:32 AM, Nathan Vidican wrote:

 On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Ryan Coleman ryan.cole...@cwis.biz wrote:
 
 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 keys/server.crt
 key keys/server.key # This file should be kept secret
 dh keys/dh1024.pem
 # Don't put this in the keys directory unless user nobody can read it
 crl-verify keys/crl.pem
 #Make sure this is your tunnel address pool
 server 192.168.47.0 255.255.255.0
 ifconfig-pool-persist ipp.txt
 #This is the route to push to the client, add more if necessary
 #push route 192.168.46.254 255.255.255.0
 push route 192.168.47.0 255.255.255.0
 push dhcp-option DNS 192.168.45.10
 keepalive 10 120
 cipher BF-CBC #Blowfish encryption
 comp-lzo
 #fragment
 user nobody
 group nobody
 persist-key
 persist-tun
 status openvpn-status.log
 verb 6
 mute 5
 
 
 client.conf:
 #Begin client.conf
 client
 dev tap
 proto 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 keys/ryanc.crt
 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 - 
 which we have another VPN connecting the two networks (not running on a VPN 
 I can do much with).
 
 
 Do you have packet forwarding (routing /gateway) enabled? An
 all-important, yet sometimes forgotten step...
 check if:
 
   sysctl net.inet.ip.forwarding
 
 returns 1 for enabled or not. You can enable it right away by setting
 to 1, and/or view the instructions in the handbook for greater detail
 including how to set as a startup option as well:
 http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/network-routing.html

Yes, it is enabled.

And Maciej, I had server-bridge running before and it wasn't routing ICMP, nor 
anything else.

I have ipnat enabled - as was recommended by one guide - and am routing 
everything from 192.168.47.0/24 to 0.0.0.0/32 (I'm not well versed on this 
specific area but that seems like it should be 0/0, right?)

Relevant rc.conf:
defaultrouter=192.168.46.254
hostname=nbserver1.allstatecom.local
ifconfig_em0=inet 192.168.46.2  netmask 255.255.255.0
openvpn_enable=YES
openvpn_configfile=/usr/local/etc/openvpn/server.conf
gateway_enable=YES
ipnat_enable=YES

Thanks again,
Ryan


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: OpenVPN routing

2011-04-26 Thread Diego Arias
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Ryan Coleman ryan.cole...@cwis.biz wrote:


 On Apr 26, 2011, at 8:32 AM, Nathan Vidican wrote:

  On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Ryan Coleman ryan.cole...@cwis.biz
 wrote:
 
  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 keys/server.crt
  key keys/server.key # This file should be kept secret
  dh keys/dh1024.pem
  # Don't put this in the keys directory unless user nobody can read it
  crl-verify keys/crl.pem
  #Make sure this is your tunnel address pool
  server 192.168.47.0 255.255.255.0
  ifconfig-pool-persist ipp.txt
  #This is the route to push to the client, add more if necessary
  #push route 192.168.46.254 255.255.255.0
  push route 192.168.47.0 255.255.255.0
  push dhcp-option DNS 192.168.45.10
  keepalive 10 120
  cipher BF-CBC #Blowfish encryption
  comp-lzo
  #fragment
  user nobody
  group nobody
  persist-key
  persist-tun
  status openvpn-status.log
  verb 6
  mute 5
 
 
  client.conf:
  #Begin client.conf
  client
  dev tap
  proto 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 keys/ryanc.crt
  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 - which we have another VPN connecting the two networks
 (not running on a VPN I can do much with).
 
 
  Do you have packet forwarding (routing /gateway) enabled? An
  all-important, yet sometimes forgotten step...
  check if:
 
sysctl net.inet.ip.forwarding
 
  returns 1 for enabled or not. You can enable it right away by setting
  to 1, and/or view the instructions in the handbook for greater detail
  including how to set as a startup option as well:
 
 http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/network-routing.html

 Yes, it is enabled.

 And Maciej, I had server-bridge running before and it wasn't routing ICMP,
 nor anything else.

 I have ipnat enabled - as was recommended by one guide - and am routing
 everything from 192.168.47.0/24 to 0.0.0.0/32 (I'm not well versed on this
 specific area but that seems like it should be 0/0, right?)

 Relevant rc.conf:
 defaultrouter=192.168.46.254
 hostname=nbserver1.allstatecom.local
 ifconfig_em0=inet 192.168.46.2  netmask 255.255.255.0
 openvpn_enable=YES
 openvpn_configfile=/usr/local/etc/openvpn/server.conf
 gateway_enable=YES
 ipnat_enable=YES

 Thanks again,
 Ryan


 ___
 freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to 
 freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


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

-- 
Still Going Strong!!!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: OpenVPN routing

2011-04-26 Thread Maciej Milewski
On Tuesday 26 of April 2011 15:45:22, Ryan Coleman wrote:
 I have a bridge set up, pingable... but can't ping the em1 (192.168.46.2) 
from the remote 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 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 vpn client?

You may try to look into tcpdump on the vpn router to find what is going with 
your packets.And for such scenario like vpnclient-vpnserver-network you may 
even not need nat just simple routing will be enough as long as you set it up 
on right.

My setup is based on tun interfaces and works like a charm. I don't use nat 
and I only added routing info to the specific routers in the internal 
networks.

Maciej Milewski
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: OpenVPN routing

2011-04-26 Thread Ryan Coleman
On Apr 26, 2011, at 9:53 AM, Maciej Milewski wrote:

 On Tuesday 26 of April 2011 15:45:22, Ryan Coleman wrote:
 I have a bridge set up, pingable... but can't ping the em1 (192.168.46.2) 
 from the remote 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 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 vpn client?
 
 You may try to look into tcpdump on the vpn router to find what is going with 
 your packets.And for such scenario like vpnclient-vpnserver-network you may 
 even not need nat just simple routing will be enough as long as you set it up 
 on right.
 
 My setup is based on tun interfaces and works like a charm. I don't use nat 
 and I only added routing info to the specific routers in the internal 
 networks.
 
 Maciej Milewski

I'm going to have to get this information when I get home and am not on the 
office LAN. I can do ping tests specifically through the tap0 interface but not 
check the netstat report properly from inside the network.

--
Ryan


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: OpenVPN routing

2011-04-26 Thread Ryan Coleman

On Apr 26, 2011, at 3:50 PM, Ryan Coleman wrote:

 On Apr 26, 2011, at 9:53 AM, Maciej Milewski wrote:
 
 On Tuesday 26 of April 2011 15:45:22, Ryan Coleman wrote:
 I have a bridge set up, pingable... but can't ping the em1 (192.168.46.2) 
 from the remote 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 
 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 vpn client?
 
 You may try to look into tcpdump on the vpn router to find what is going 
 with 
 your packets.And for such scenario like vpnclient-vpnserver-network you 
 may 
 even not need nat just simple routing will be enough as long as you set it 
 up 
 on right.
 
 My setup is based on tun interfaces and works like a charm. I don't use nat 
 and I only added routing info to the specific routers in the internal 
 networks.
 
 Maciej Milewski
 
 I'm going to have to get this information when I get home and am not on the 
 office LAN. I can do ping tests specifically through the tap0 interface but 
 not check the netstat report properly from inside the network.
Maciej,

Here you go: 

Ryan-Colemans-MacBook-Pro:~ ryanjcole$ netstat -rn
Routing tables

Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use   Netif Expire
default10.0.1.1   UGSc   610 en1
10.0.1/24  link#5 UCS 30 en1
10.0.1.1   0:23:12:f7:37:cc   UHLWI  89 1268 en1   1142
10.0.1.2   0:14:d1:1f:79:1b   UHLWI   0  837 en1183
10.0.1.198 127.0.0.1  UHS 00 lo0
10.0.1.255 ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff  UHLWbI  06 en1
127127.0.0.1  UCS 00 lo0
127.0.0.1  127.0.0.1  UH  2   75 lo0
169.254link#5 UCS 00 en1
172.16.87/24   link#7 UC  10  vmnet1
172.16.87.255  ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff  UHLWbI  03  vmnet1
192.168.46 192.168.47.2   UGSc00tap0
192.168.47 link#10UC  10tap0
192.168.47.2   link#10UHLWI   10tap0

Internet6:
Destination Gateway Flags   
  Netif Expire
::1 ::1 UH  
lo0
fe80::%lo0/64   fe80::1%lo0 Uc  
lo0
fe80::1%lo0 link#1  UHL 
lo0
fe80::%en1/64   link#5  UC  
en1
fe80::224:36ff:fea1:1d68%en10:24:36:a1:1d:68UHLW
en1
fe80::9227:e4ff:fef8:b2fb%en1   90:27:e4:f8:b2:fb   UHL 
lo0
ff01::/32   ::1 Um  
lo0
ff02::/32   ::1 UmC 
lo0
ff02::/32   link#5  UmC 
en1

Ryan-Colemans-MacBook-Pro:~ ryanjcole$ ping 192.168.46.2
PING 192.168.46.2 (192.168.46.2): 56 data bytes
Request timeout for icmp_seq 0
Request timeout for icmp_seq 1
Request timeout for icmp_seq 2

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: OpenVPN routing

2011-04-26 Thread Ryan Coleman

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 that and it had no effect 
:-\___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: routing to a directly attached subnet without an address in this subnet

2011-04-25 Thread Lionel Fourquaux

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::/64 is directly attached to em1. The default route points to em0. 
I would like to route packets addressed to 2001:db8:0:1::/64 to interface em1, 
without allocating an address in 2001:db8:0:1::/64 for em1. (Or to understand 
why this would be impossible).



Why do you want to do this?


Because I think it would look better that way.


 How do you expect the hosts on the attached networks to get packets to you?


They are already using fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abd as default gateway, so 
this is not a problem.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: routing to a directly attached subnet without an address in this subnet

2011-04-25 Thread Lionel Fourquaux

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 are 
routed as they should.



It is perfectly legitimate for two (or more) separate networks to share
the same physical media.


Yes.


*ONLY* the address of the device distinguishes which network the trafic
goes to/from.


But this is the destination address on packets. The point here is, why 
would the router need an address that is never used as source or 
destination?



I can't see any strong reason for requiring that em1 have
an address for every directly attached subnet packets are routed
to.


Think about how 'reply' packets have to be routed by other machines
on that subnet.


Packets from other machines are routed to fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abd 
(link local address of the router), so this part is fine.


Thanks!

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: routing to a directly attached subnet without an address in this subnet

2011-04-25 Thread Lionel Fourquaux

On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:17:40PM +1000, Daniel Marsh wrote:

What you need to verify is the default routes on the client hosts. It's very
likely your packets and your initial route add commands on your dual host
machine are correct, yet the return route on the other clients are
incorrect.


I have checked that. Actually, I can ping the router from the clients. 
What does not work is initiating a packet exchange from the router's side.


Short reminder:
 em0 has addresses fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abc and 2001:db8::1
 em1 has address fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abd
 default route is to em0
 2001:db8:0:1::/64 is router to em1 
  (route add -inet6 2001:db8:0:1::/64 -iface em1)
 clients connected to em1 have addresses in 2001:db8:0:1::/64 and default 
  route to fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abd


If I reboot the router, then try to ping a client in 2001:db8:0:1::/64, 
directly connected to em1, ping6 fails with sendmsg: Operation not 
permitted. tcpdump does not show anything being sent to this client. The 
client's MAC does not show up in ndp -a.


If I ping the router from the client, I get answers. The client's MAC 
show up in the NDP table, and I can ping the client from the router as 
long as it is still listed in the NDP table. If I clear the table with 
ndp -c, I can't ping from the router any more. If I reboot and add 
a static entry for the client in the NDP table, I can ping this client.


All this seems to point to NDP 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 run).


Google seems to turn up some mentions of cloning routes that look like 
a way to solve this (I'm not quite sure), but this was apparently 
removed in a recent reimplementation of ARP+NDP (arp-v2). Maybe some 
functionality was lost in the process, but I don't know about this.


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


OpenVPN routing

2011-04-25 Thread Ryan Coleman
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 keys/server.crt
key keys/server.key # This file should be kept secret
dh keys/dh1024.pem
# Don't put this in the keys directory unless user nobody can read it
crl-verify keys/crl.pem
#Make sure this is your tunnel address pool
server 192.168.47.0 255.255.255.0
ifconfig-pool-persist ipp.txt
#This is the route to push to the client, add more if necessary
#push route 192.168.46.254 255.255.255.0
push route 192.168.47.0 255.255.255.0
push dhcp-option DNS 192.168.45.10
keepalive 10 120
cipher BF-CBC #Blowfish encryption
comp-lzo
#fragment
user nobody
group nobody
persist-key
persist-tun
status openvpn-status.log
verb 6
mute 5


client.conf: 
#Begin client.conf
client
dev tap
proto 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 keys/ryanc.crt
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 - 
which we have another 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, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: OpenVPN routing

2011-04-25 Thread Ryan Coleman
Also:
[root@nbserver1 /usr/home/ryanc]# ifconfig
em0: flags=8943UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 
1500
options=98VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM
ether 00:14:22:15:dc:65
inet 192.168.46.2 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.46.255
media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT full-duplex)
status: active
tap0: flags=8943UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 
1500
options=8LINKSTATE
ether 00:bd:7e:86:1d:00
inet 192.168.47.1 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.47.255
Opened by PID 10341
bridge0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
ether 46:e1:75:c6:a3:a7
inet 192.168.47.254 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.47.255
id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15
maxage 20 holdcnt 6 proto rstp maxaddr 100 timeout 1200
root id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 ifcost 0 port 0
member: tap0 flags=143LEARNING,DISCOVER,AUTOEDGE,AUTOPTP
ifmaxaddr 0 port 5 priority 128 path cost 200
member: em0 flags=143LEARNING,DISCOVER,AUTOEDGE,AUTOPTP
ifmaxaddr 0 port 1 priority 128 path cost 2


On Apr 25, 2011, at 9:36 PM, Ryan Coleman wrote:

 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 keys/server.crt
 key keys/server.key # This file should be kept secret
 dh keys/dh1024.pem
 # Don't put this in the keys directory unless user nobody can read it
 crl-verify keys/crl.pem
 #Make sure this is your tunnel address pool
 server 192.168.47.0 255.255.255.0
 ifconfig-pool-persist ipp.txt
 #This is the route to push to the client, add more if necessary
 #push route 192.168.46.254 255.255.255.0
 push route 192.168.47.0 255.255.255.0
 push dhcp-option DNS 192.168.45.10
 keepalive 10 120
 cipher BF-CBC #Blowfish encryption
 comp-lzo
 #fragment
 user nobody
 group nobody
 persist-key
 persist-tun
 status openvpn-status.log
 verb 6
 mute 5
 
 
 client.conf: 
 #Begin client.conf
 client
 dev tap
 proto 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 keys/ryanc.crt
 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 - 
 which we have another 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, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


routing to a directly attached subnet without an address in this subnet

2011-04-24 Thread Lionel Fourquaux

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 em0, and network 
2001:db8:0:1::/64 is directly attached to em1. The default 
route points to em0. I would like to route packets addressed 
to 2001:db8:0:1::/64 to interface em1, without allocating an 
address in 2001:db8:0:1::/64 for em1. (Or to understand why this 
would be impossible).


I have tried to add a route using:
 route add -ipv6 2001:db8:0:1::/64 -iface em1
(and several variations), but this fails (route returns 
successfully, but I can't ping anything on 2001:db8:0:1::/64). 
On the other hand, if I give address 2001:db8:0:1::1/64 to em1, 
ping6 works and packets are routed successfully. I guess that 
the differenceis that the OS can't figure out which interface 
to use for NDP in the first case. However, ndp(8) can create 
static entries in the NDP table for individual hosts but not 
whole subnets.


I can't see any strong reason for requiring that em1 have 
an address for every directly attached subnet packets are 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?

I can mark the additional addresses on em1 as deprecated, possibly 
even firewall out anything going to these addresses. From the outside, 
the router would behave exactly the way I want. However, this 
does not seem as nice as such a simple setup should be.


This is on FreeBSD 8.2 (i386), GENERIC kernel. I have slightly 
simplified the description but all the relevant parts should be here.


Anticipated thanks for your answers, and best regards.

-- Lionel Fourquaux

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: routing to a directly attached subnet without an address in this subnet

2011-04-24 Thread David Scheidt

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 em0, and network 
 2001:db8:0:1::/64 is directly attached to em1. The default route points to 
 em0. I would like to route packets addressed to 2001:db8:0:1::/64 to 
 interface em1, without allocating an address in 2001:db8:0:1::/64 for em1. 
 (Or to understand why this would be impossible).
 

Why do you want to do this?  How do you expect the hosts on the attached 
networks to get packets to you?  

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Marble and routing

2011-04-08 Thread Steven Friedrich
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:  FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE i386 (5.9 MB kernel)
Platform:HP pavilion zd8000 (zd8215us)
CPU: 2.40GHz Intel Pentium 4 with 511 MB memory

FreeBSD Audio Driver (newpcm: 32bit 2009061500/i386)
Installed devices:
pcm0: CMedia CMI8738 (play/rec) default
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Marble and routing

2011-04-08 Thread Robert Bonomi
 From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org  Fri Apr  8 18:19:15 2011
 From: Steven Friedrich free...@insightbb.com
 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 OpenRoute service.

 Does it require any subscription payment, os is it available free?

Google is your friend.  search string marble routing (oddly enough )

What I got as the 4th link
   http://nienhueser.de/blog/?p=137http://nienhueser.de/blog/?p=137
seems very relevant to your question.

To quote Sgt. Schultz, I know nothing about KDE, marble, or the openroute 
service.


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Tuning routing table size in FreeBSD 8.0 and 7.2

2011-02-25 Thread Valentin Bud
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 9:37 PM, nikitha sumi.tec...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thank you all, for your timely reply..
 To answer Niko's question: Just i'm doing some performance/stress testing
 of
 a freebsd router.. :-)

 -Sumi

 On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:11 PM, Nikos Vassiliadis nv...@gmx.com wrote:

  On 2/24/2011 4:51 PM, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
 
  On 2/24/11 3:00 PM, nikitha wrote:
 
  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?
 
  [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 thought of
  multiple routing tables and vnet).
 
  Out of curiosity, why would you want such a limit?
 
 
 ___
 freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to 
 freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Hello Sumi,

 What tools do you use to perform the tests?

thanks,
v
-- 
network warrior
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Tuning routing table size in FreeBSD 8.0 and 7.2

2011-02-24 Thread nikitha
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..

-Sumi
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Tuning routing table size in FreeBSD 8.0 and 7.2

2011-02-24 Thread Damien Fleuriot
On 2/24/11 3:00 PM, nikitha wrote:
 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..
 
 -Sumi
 ___
 freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, 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 mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


RE: Tuning routing table size in FreeBSD 8.0 and 7.2

2011-02-24 Thread Gary Gatten
Sysctl -a lists all options.  This MAY be what you want:

net.inet.ip.rtmaxcache
 - Upper limit on dynamically learned routes

http://people.freebsd.org/~hmp/utilities/satbl/sysctl-net.html


HTH

Gary
-Original Message-
From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org 
[mailto:owner-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 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..

-Sumi
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org





font size=1
div style='border:none;border-bottom:double windowtext 2.25pt;padding:0in 0in 
1.0pt 0in'
/div
This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient
 and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential.
 If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
 any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email
 and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited.  If you have
 received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by
 return email and delete this email from your system.
/font

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Tuning routing table size in FreeBSD 8.0 and 7.2

2011-02-24 Thread Nikos Vassiliadis

On 2/24/2011 4:51 PM, Damien Fleuriot wrote:

On 2/24/11 3:00 PM, nikitha wrote:

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?

[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 thought of
multiple routing tables and vnet).

Out of curiosity, why would you want such a limit?

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Tuning routing table size in FreeBSD 8.0 and 7.2

2011-02-24 Thread nikitha
Thank you all, for your timely reply..
To answer Niko's question: Just i'm doing some performance/stress testing of
a freebsd router.. :-)

-Sumi

On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:11 PM, Nikos Vassiliadis nv...@gmx.com wrote:

 On 2/24/2011 4:51 PM, Damien Fleuriot wrote:

 On 2/24/11 3:00 PM, nikitha wrote:

 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?

 [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 thought of
 multiple routing tables and vnet).

 Out of curiosity, why would you want such a limit?


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Routing issue?

2010-11-12 Thread Wojciech Puchar

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 but it's not taking since it already 
exists, and I've run multiple IP'd servers before without issue.

I'm really lost.___

you can't have 2 gateways.

but you may configure ipfw firewall and use it's fwd function to define 
exactly what is routed through what, whatever your wish is.


not that long ago i had 7 links to my server doing ISP business, as there 
was no way to get single large link that place.


no problems
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Routing issue?

2010-11-12 Thread Ryan Coleman
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 255.255.255.248
 defaultrouter=70.89.123.6
 hostname=se**.somehtingelse.biz
 
 
 I tried to add the gateway for link2 but it's not taking since it already 
 exists, and I've run multiple IP'd servers before without issue.
 
 I'm really lost.___
 you can't have 2 gateways.
 
 but you may configure ipfw firewall and use it's fwd function to define 
 exactly what is routed through what, whatever your wish is.
 
 not that long ago i had 7 links to my server doing ISP business, as there was 
 no way to get single large link that place.
 
 no problems
 ___
 freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Routing issue?

2010-11-11 Thread Ryan Coleman
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  Use  Netif Expire
default70.89.123.6UGS 7 1090em0
70.89.123.0/29 link#1 U   2  837em0
70.89.123.4link#2 UHS 0   25lo0
70.89.123.5link#1 UHS 00lo0
127.0.0.1  link#5 UH  0  863lo0

Internet6:
Destination   Gateway   Flags  
Netif Expire
::1   ::1   UH  lo0
fe80::%lo0/64 link#5U   lo0
fe80::1%lo0   link#5UHS lo0
ff01:5::/32   fe80::1%lo0   U   lo0
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 but it's not taking since it already 
exists, and I've run multiple IP'd servers before without issue.

I'm really lost.___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Routing issue?

2010-11-11 Thread Gary Gatten
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 owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org
To: Free BSD Questions list freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Thu Nov 11 21:41:40 2010
Subject: Routing issue?

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  Use  Netif Expire
default70.89.123.6UGS 7 1090em0
70.89.123.0/29 link#1 U   2  837em0
70.89.123.4link#2 UHS 0   25lo0
70.89.123.5link#1 UHS 00lo0
127.0.0.1  link#5 UH  0  863lo0

Internet6:
Destination   Gateway   Flags  
Netif Expire
::1   ::1   UH  lo0
fe80::%lo0/64 link#5U   lo0
fe80::1%lo0   link#5UHS lo0
ff01:5::/32   fe80::1%lo0   U   lo0
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 but it's not taking since it already 
exists, and I've run multiple IP'd servers before without issue.

I'm really lost.___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org





font size=1
div style='border:none;border-bottom:double windowtext 2.25pt;padding:0in 0in 
1.0pt 0in'
/div
This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient
 and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential.
 If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
 any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email
 and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited.  If you have
 received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by
 return email and delete this email from your system.
/font

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

{Solved} Re: Routing issue?

2010-11-11 Thread Ryan Coleman
It didn't work until I bridged the connections.

[r...@server /usr/home/ryan]# ifconfig bridge create
bridge0
[r...@server /usr/home/ryan]# ifconfig bridge0
bridge0: flags=8802BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
ether 0a:df:a2:b3:3e:96
id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 32768 hellotime 2 fwddelay 15
maxage 20 holdcnt 6 proto rstp maxaddr 100 timeout 1200
root id 00:00:00:00:00:00 priority 0 ifcost 0 port 0
[r...@server /usr/home/ryan]# ifconfig bridge0 addm em0 addm em1 up


On Nov 11, 2010, at 10:00 PM, Gary Gatten wrote:

 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 
 owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org
 To: Free BSD Questions list freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
 Sent: Thu Nov 11 21:41:40 2010
 Subject: Routing issue?
 
 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  Use  Netif Expire
 default70.89.123.6UGS 7 1090em0
 70.89.123.0/29 link#1 U   2  837em0
 70.89.123.4link#2 UHS 0   25lo0
 70.89.123.5link#1 UHS 00lo0
 127.0.0.1  link#5 UH  0  863lo0
 
 Internet6:
 Destination   Gateway   Flags  
 Netif Expire
 ::1   ::1   UH  
 lo0
 fe80::%lo0/64 link#5U   
 lo0
 fe80::1%lo0   link#5UHS 
 lo0
 ff01:5::/32   fe80::1%lo0   U   
 lo0
 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 but it's not taking since it already 
 exists, and I've run multiple IP'd servers before without issue.
 
 I'm really lost.___
 freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
 
 
 
 
 
 font size=1
 div style='border:none;border-bottom:double windowtext 2.25pt;padding:0in 
 0in 1.0pt 0in'
 /div
 This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient
 and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential.
 If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
 any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email
 and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited.  If you have
 received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by
 return email and delete this email from your system.
 /font
 
 ___
 freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Routing Question

2010-08-27 Thread Patrick Lamaiziere
Le Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:17:19 -0700,
Doug Hardie bc...@lafn.org 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 the same source network on both at the same
 time.  The only distinction I see in the input packets between the
 two paths is the MAC address of the router.  I don't see any way in
 pf or the system to use that to affect the return path
 though.

the filter option reply-to looks to be what you need. It works by
keeping the state of a connection (see pf.conf(5)).
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Routing Question

2010-08-27 Thread Doug Hardie

On 27 August 2010, at 05:07, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:

 Le Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:17:19 -0700,
 Doug Hardie bc...@lafn.org 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 the same source network on both at the same
 time.  The only distinction I see in the input packets between the
 two paths is the MAC address of the router.  I don't see any way in
 pf or the system to use that to affect the return path
 though.
 
 the filter option reply-to looks to be what you need. It works by
 keeping the state of a connection (see pf.conf(5)).

That works great on the output if you can figure out which packets to use it 
on.  The only way I can see to separate the traffic is using the router MAC 
address.  I don't find anything in pf that will look at 
that.___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Routing Question

2010-08-27 Thread Nikos Vassiliadis

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 Hardiebc...@lafn.org  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 the same source network on
both at the same time.  The only distinction I see in the input
packets between the two paths is the MAC address of the router.
I don't see any way in pf or the system to use that to affect the
return path though.


the filter option reply-to looks to be what you need. It works
by keeping the state of a connection (see pf.conf(5)).


That works great on the output if you can figure out which packets to
use it on.  The only way I can see to separate the traffic is using
the router MAC address.  I don't find anything in pf that will look
at that.


Yes, pf cannot use the MAC address to classify a packet. The most
sensible sollution would be installing a single router to handle
both lines but I know it's not always feasible to do so for several
reasons. ipfw can use MAC addresses for classification, perhaps you
hack some rules using fwd, skipto and mac.

Nikos
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Routing Question

2010-08-26 Thread Doug Hardie
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 working.  I would 
like somehow to configure the system (I have pf in use) to be able to detect 
the packets that come from a specific router and route the return packets back 
through it.  The other network would be the default.  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 the same source network on both 
at the same time.  The only distinction I see in the input packets between the 
two paths is the MAC address of the router.  I don't see any way in pf or the 
system to use that to affect the return path 
though.___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Odd routing issue...

2010-05-11 Thread Glenn Sieb
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 itself. I can manually delete the
route, but.. where is it being set to begin with?!

Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif Expire
defaultip-66-80-251-65.ny UGS17   50   nfe0
66.80.251.64/26link#1 U   00   nfe0
caduceus   link#1 UHS 07lo0
(much snippage)
localhost  link#2 UH  00lo0


Nothing's changed in my /etc/rc.conf from when I was running
7.2-RELEASE... This behavior didn't happen with 7.2. And, I don't see
anything in /usr/src/UPDATING that seems relevant (unless, naturally,
I'm missing something). My google-fu keeps bringing me to the handbook,
but I don't see anything useful in there that might apply.

If I restart netif, the mysterious caduceus route pops up again.

If someone can point me in the right direction, I'd really appreciate it.

Thanks in advance!
Best,
--Glenn
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: Odd routing issue...

2010-05-11 Thread Ed Jobs
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 would expect. After all, the machine knows that 
to ping its own ip, it has to use the lo0 interface.
It just resolves your ip with the hostname of the machine.
So as far as i see, this is the intended behaviour.

(You can use netstat -rn to see the actual ip and not hostnames.)

If you can't ping localhost, i'd say that the problem lies elsewere. 
(firewalls probably)
You can check with tcpdump to see what happens and your pings don't get a 
reply.

-- 
Real programmers don't document. If it was hard to write, it should be hard to 
understand.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


what means: route: writing to routing socket: No such process ?

2010-04-02 Thread Matthias Apitz

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
delete net xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: not in table

The man page does not explain this.  What does this mean exactly? Thanks

matthias
-- 
Matthias Apitz
t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211
e g...@unixarea.de - w http://www.unixarea.de/
Solidarity with the imperialistic Israel?Not in my  name!
¿Solidaridad con el imperialismo de Israel? ¡No en mi nombre!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


routing for jails on public IPs, jails on private IPs between 2 servers

2009-08-05 Thread Izhar Firdaus
Hi ,

I have this question which need some comment/help on:

== the setup ==
I have 2 freebsd servers with several jails running on it. Each server
have several jails thats either listening on publicly accessible IP or
listening on a loopback/private IP. The two servers are connected
together 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 
(10.1.0.3_tun0,192.168.1.3_bge0,192.168.1.4_bge0,127.0.2.1_lo1,127.0.2.2_lo1)
- JailA(192.168.1.4_bge0)
- JailB(127.0.2.1_lo1)
- JailC(127.0.2.2_lo1)


== the issue ==

under the current config,
ServerA can connect to all private jails in ServerB through
vpn+routing and vice versa.
Private jails in ServerA can connect to public jails in ServerB
through NAT and vice versa.

However, I cant figure out how to allow public jails in ServerA to
connect to private jails in ServerB.

Anybody have idea on how to implement it?

Thanks


-- 
Mohd Izhar Firdaus Bin Ismail
Amano Hikaru  天野晃 「あまの ひかる」
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MohdIzharFirdaus
http://blog.kagesenshi.org
92C2 B295 B40B B3DC 6866  5011 5BD2 584A 8A5D 7331
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


ifconfig routing

2009-07-04 Thread John Pollock
Greets,

Here's my delemma - 

Im running FreeBSD 7.1 - that was setup with its normal host area and
added via ezjail (2) jails.

Out of jail #2, I run a IRCD for a local christian group.

I also installed a old-school BBS in jail #2, and it works great,
connects and works fine.

But, since I wish to run a few old DOS programs that are DOORS. It
recommends I install it where it can reach X, the windows  server.
Then I'll have a shot at utilizing doscmd to get them to work.

No matter how many times I install and reinstall it it fires up, but
cant seem to access it via telnet  either locally or from outside my
computer via telnet.

For further info, my system setup is the internet  goes through my
DSL/ROUTER set in BRIDGE MODE, to my DLINK wireless router.

My jail #2 is set to PRIVATE IP 192.168.0.103 - jail #1 set to
192.168.0.102 and host part of computer set to 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
127.0.0.1  127.0.0.1  UH  00lo0
192.168.0.0/24 link#1 UC  00vr0
192.168.0.100:0d:88:9f:e2:5f  UHLW2  986vr0
1102
192.168.0.100  00:0e:a6:a0:db:24  UHLW14lo0
192.168.0.102  00:0e:a6:a0:db:24  UHLW1   12lo0
192.168.0.103  00:0e:a6:a0:db:24  UHLW157562lo0

Internet6:
Destination   Gateway   Flags
Netif Expire
::1   ::1   UHL
lo0
fe80::%lo0/64 fe80::1%lo0   U
lo0
fe80::1%lo0   link#3UHL
lo0
ff01:3::/32   fe80::1%lo0   UC
lo0
ff02::%lo0/32 fe80::1%lo0   UC
lo0 
===

ifconfig results below:

$ ifconfig
vr0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu
1500
options=2808VLAN_MTU,WOL_UCAST,WOL_MAGIC
ether 00:0e:a6:a0:db:24
inet 192.168.0.100 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.0.255
inet 192.168.0.103 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.0.255
inet 192.168.0.102 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.0.255
media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex)
status: active
plip0: flags=108810POINTOPOINT,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST,NEEDSGIANT metric 0
mtu 1500
lo0: flags=8049UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 16384
inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x3 
inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128 
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff00 
$ 




___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: PF Routing to VPN Device

2009-06-18 Thread Valentin Bud
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:31 PM, Mike Sweetser - Adhost
mik...@adhost.comwrote:

 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
 the PF server as such.

 We've set up the following rules:

 block in log
 pass in on $int_if route-to 10.1.4.200 from 10.1.4.0/24 to { 10.1.1.0/24
 10.1.2.0/24)

 However, the block in log is catching the return traffic.  From pflog
 when somebody on the VPN (10.1.2.105) tries to connect to 10.1.4.25 on
 port 80:

 00 rule 28/0(match): block in on bge1: 10.1.4.25.80 
 10.1.2.105.3558: [|tcp]

 If we remove the block in log, the traffic works.

 What are we missing?

 Thanks,
 Mike


Hello Mike,

 What version on FBSD are you using? The keep state is implicit from 7.0 as
far as i know. I might not be right so someone please correct.

 If that is the case you should add keep state to your rule and see what
happens.

my 7c,
v
-- 
network warrior since 2005
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


RE: PF Routing to VPN Device

2009-06-18 Thread Mike Sweetser - Adhost
 -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 10:31 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
   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
   the PF server as such.
 
   We've set up the following rules:
 
   block in log
   pass in on $int_if route-to 10.1.4.200 from 10.1.4.0/24 to {
 10.1.1.0/24
   10.1.2.0/24)
 
   However, the block in log is catching the return traffic.  From
 pflog
   when somebody on the VPN (10.1.2.105) tries to connect to
 10.1.4.25 on
   port 80:
 
   00 rule 28/0(match): block in on bge1: 10.1.4.25.80 
   10.1.2.105.3558: [|tcp]
 
   If we remove the block in log, the traffic works.
 
   What are we missing?
 
   Thanks,
   Mike
 
 
 Hello Mike,
 
  What version on FBSD are you using? The keep state is implicit from
 7.0 as
 far as i know. I might not be right so someone please correct.
 
  If that is the case you should add keep state to your rule and see
 what happens.

We're using FreeBSD 7.2.

Mike
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: PF Routing to VPN Device

2009-06-18 Thread Valentin Bud
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Valentin Bud valentin@gmail.comwrote:



 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
 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
 the PF server as such.

 We've set up the following rules:

 block in log
 pass in on $int_if route-to 10.1.4.200 from 10.1.4.0/24 to { 10.1.1.0/24
 10.1.2.0/24)

 However, the block in log is catching the return traffic.  From pflog
 when somebody on the VPN (10.1.2.105) tries to connect to 10.1.4.25 on
 port 80:

 00 rule 28/0(match): block in on bge1: 10.1.4.25.80 
 10.1.2.105.3558: [|tcp]

 If we remove the block in log, the traffic works.

 What are we missing?

 Thanks,
 Mike

  Hello Mike,
 What version on FBSD are you using? The keep state is implicit from 7.0
AFAIK.

So if you are using a version prior 7.0 you should add keep state so the
return traffic
can be passed.

v
-- 
network warrior since 2005
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: PF Routing to VPN Device

2009-06-18 Thread Tim Judd
On 6/17/09, 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
 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
 the PF server as such.

 We've set up the following rules:

 block in log
 pass in on $int_if route-to 10.1.4.200 from 10.1.4.0/24 to { 10.1.1.0/24
 10.1.2.0/24)

 However, the block in log is catching the return traffic.  From pflog
 when somebody on the VPN (10.1.2.105) tries to connect to 10.1.4.25 on
 port 80:

 00 rule 28/0(match): block in on bge1: 10.1.4.25.80 
 10.1.2.105.3558: [|tcp]

 If we remove the block in log, the traffic works.

 What are we missing?

 Thanks,
 Mike



Mike,

I know the typical firewall rules that are googleable are one of two
basic starting policies..

-- 1.
  block in all
  pass out all


-- 2.
  block all



They've become a headache to me to configure a firewall and I now
start with this base.  In this example, fxp0 is facing the Internet,
and xl0 is facing the trusted network.

-- 3.
  block in on fxp0 all
  pass out

This adds the benefit that VPN connections, TUNs, GIFs, and all other
ethernet devices aren't blindly evaluated to a simple block in rule,
rather it's just the fxp0 interface public Internet traffic that is
being blocked, while TUNs, GIFs, and the like are exempt from that
rule entry line.



Might you try by editing your rules to just block your public IP
firewall interface?



Good luck.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


PF Routing to VPN Device

2009-06-17 Thread Mike Sweetser - Adhost
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
the PF server as such.

We've set up the following rules: 

block in log
pass in on $int_if route-to 10.1.4.200 from 10.1.4.0/24 to { 10.1.1.0/24
10.1.2.0/24)

However, the block in log is catching the return traffic.  From pflog
when somebody on the VPN (10.1.2.105) tries to connect to 10.1.4.25 on
port 80:

00 rule 28/0(match): block in on bge1: 10.1.4.25.80 
10.1.2.105.3558: [|tcp]

If we remove the block in log, the traffic works.

What are we missing?

Thanks,
Mike
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


pppoe routing problem, default route isnt used for some hosts

2009-05-29 Thread Fabian Holler
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 should also without an explicit
route for this Hosts use the default gw.

My Setup:
FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE
mppd to make an PPPOE connection to my internet service
provider.
PF as firewall

To isolate the problem I used an minimal pf.conf:
---
inetif=ng0
lanif=vr0

scrub all max-mss 1492
pass quick on lo0 all
pass out on $inetif proto { tcp udp icmp } all keep state
pass on $lanif from any to any
---
I also tried pppd instead of mppd(dont helps).


Hosts that I can't connect to, are ie spiegel.de, tagesschau.de, freebsd.org
southparkstudios.com
I.e
TCP connections to Port 80 of southparkstudios.com dont work.
If I add an explicit route:
route add southparkstudios.com 213.191.84.199
Connections with nc to port 80 works
(the connections tests are made from the router, the iface MTUs are correct)

Anybody have an idea what could be wrong?

I have no idea anymore
(its also not an provider problem, when i made the pppoe connection from 
windows I can connect to alls hosts)


thanks for any hints:)

best regards

Fabian


-
My routing table:

# netstat -ra
Routing tables

Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif Expire
defaultlo1.br04.weham.de. UGS 015505ng0
1.1.1.10x1010101  link#1 UC  00rl0
exxx45031.adsl.al lo0UHS 00lo0
localhost  localhost  UH  0  433lo0
192.168.113.0  link#2 UC  00vr0
xyz 00:30:18:ad:26:88  UHLW124005lo0
mail.xyz.ath.cx 00:30:18:ad:26:88  UHLW186400lo0
http.xyz.ath.cx 00:30:18:ad:26:88  UHLW1  770lo0
192.168.113.255ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff  UHLWb   1 3228vr0
lo1.br04.weham.de. e176145031.adsl.al UH  10ng0

[... ipv6 stuff]


Interface infos:

# netstat -ira
NameMtu Network   Address  Ipkts IerrsOpkts Oerrs  Coll
rl01492 Link#1  00:02:2a:b0:4a:e0 26128479 0 19855993 0 0
  01:00:5e:00:00:010  0
rl01492 1.1.1.10x101 1.1.1.1  0 - 2653 - -
  ALL-SYSTEMS.MCAST
vr01500 Link#2  00:30:18:ad:26:88 12662831 0 17678949 0 0
  01:00:5e:00:00:01 2038  0
vr01500 192.168.113.0 xyz 9745471 - 13639692 - -
  ALL-SYSTEMS.MCAST
vr01500 192.168.113.0 mail.xyz.a   291626 -86404 - -
  ALL-SYSTEMS.MCAST
vr01500 192.168.113.0 http.xyz.a 6814 -  770 - -
  ALL-SYSTEMS.MCAST
lo0   16384 Link#3  113929 0   113929 0 0
lo0   16384 fe80:3::1 fe80:3::10 -0 - -
  ff01:3::1  (refs: 1)
  ff02:3::2:a61d:93b4(refs: 1)
  ff02:3::1  (refs: 1)
  ff02:3::1:ff00:1   (refs: 1)
lo0   16384 localhost ::1  0 -0 - -
  ff01:3::1  (refs: 1)
  ff02:3::2:a61d:93b4(refs: 1)
  ff02:3::1  (refs: 1)
  ff02:3::1:ff00:1   (refs: 1)
lo0   16384 your-net  localhost  433 - 2433 - -
  ALL-SYSTEMS.MCAST
pflog 33204 Link#4   0 080567 0 0
tun0*  1500 Link#5   78331 076381 0 0
tun99  1500 Link#6 353 0  375 0 0
ng01492 Link#717114096 0 13449463 0 0
ng01492 85.176.145.31 e176145031.adsl.a12398 -17011 - -
  ALL-SYSTEMS.MCAST


mpd.conf:

default:
load PPPoE
PPPoE:
new -i ng0 PPPoE PPPoE
set iface addrs 1.1.1.1 2.2.2.2
set iface route default
set iface enable on-demand
set iface idle 0
set bundle disable multilink
set bundle authname xxy
set iface disable tcpmssfix
set link no acfcomp protocomp
set link disable pap chap
set link accept chap
set link mtu 1492
set link mru 1492
set link keep-alive 10 60
set ipcp yes vjcomp
set iface enable tcpmssfix#I know pf also do this in my setup, but Iam 
despaired:)
set ipcp ranges 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0
set nat disable
log +link
open

Re: pppoe routing problem, default route isnt used for some hosts

2009-05-29 Thread Nikos Vassiliadis

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. So the connection should also without an explicit
route for this Hosts use the default gw.

My Setup:
FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE
mppd to make an PPPOE connection to my internet service
provider.
PF as firewall

To isolate the problem I used an minimal pf.conf:
---
inetif=ng0
lanif=vr0

scrub all max-mss 1492
pass quick on lo0 all
pass out on $inetif proto { tcp udp icmp } all keep state
pass on $lanif from any to any
---
I also tried pppd instead of mppd(dont helps).


Hosts that I can't connect to, are ie spiegel.de, tagesschau.de, freebsd.org
southparkstudios.com
I.e
TCP connections to Port 80 of southparkstudios.com dont work.
If I add an explicit route:
route add southparkstudios.com 213.191.84.199


Besides netstat -rn, you can use route get southparkstudios.com
to check a route for a destination.


Connections with nc to port 80 works
(the connections tests are made from the router, the iface MTUs are correct)


You cannot test MTU settings using nc, since initial packets, that
is, small packets, are always smaller than your MTU. You can test
MTU using fetch or ftp or nc + GET /some.big.file.



Anybody have an idea what could be wrong?

I have no idea anymore
(its also not an provider problem, when i made the pppoe connection from 
windows I can connect to alls hosts)


thanks for any hints:)

best regards

Fabian


-
My routing table:

# netstat -ra
Routing tables

Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs  Use  Netif Expire
defaultlo1.br04.weham.de. UGS 015505ng0
1.1.1.10x1010101  link#1 UC  00rl0

What is this ???
It looks like not-contiguous netmask?


exxx45031.adsl.al lo0UHS 00lo0
localhost  localhost  UH  0  433lo0
192.168.113.0  link#2 UC  00vr0
xyz 00:30:18:ad:26:88  UHLW124005lo0
mail.xyz.ath.cx 00:30:18:ad:26:88  UHLW186400lo0
http.xyz.ath.cx 00:30:18:ad:26:88  UHLW1  770lo0
192.168.113.255ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff  UHLWb   1 3228vr0
lo1.br04.weham.de. e176145031.adsl.al UH  10ng0

[... ipv6 stuff]


Interface infos:

# netstat -ira
NameMtu Network   Address  Ipkts IerrsOpkts Oerrs  Coll
rl01492 Link#1  00:02:2a:b0:4a:e0 26128479 0 19855993 0 0
  01:00:5e:00:00:010  0
rl01492 1.1.1.10x101 1.1.1.1  0 - 2653 - -
  ALL-SYSTEMS.MCAST
vr01500 Link#2  00:30:18:ad:26:88 12662831 0 17678949 0 0
  01:00:5e:00:00:01 2038  0
vr01500 192.168.113.0 xyz 9745471 - 13639692 - -
  ALL-SYSTEMS.MCAST
vr01500 192.168.113.0 mail.xyz.a   291626 -86404 - -
  ALL-SYSTEMS.MCAST
vr01500 192.168.113.0 http.xyz.a 6814 -  770 - -
  ALL-SYSTEMS.MCAST
lo0   16384 Link#3  113929 0   113929 0 0
lo0   16384 fe80:3::1 fe80:3::10 -0 - -
  ff01:3::1  (refs: 1)
  ff02:3::2:a61d:93b4(refs: 1)
  ff02:3::1  (refs: 1)
  ff02:3::1:ff00:1   (refs: 1)
lo0   16384 localhost ::1  0 -0 - -
  ff01:3::1  (refs: 1)
  ff02:3::2:a61d:93b4(refs: 1)
  ff02:3::1  (refs: 1)
  ff02:3::1:ff00:1   (refs: 1)
lo0   16384 your-net  localhost  433 - 2433 - -
  ALL-SYSTEMS.MCAST
pflog 33204 Link#4   0 080567 0 0
tun0*  1500 Link#5   78331 076381 0 0
tun99  1500 Link#6 353 0  375 0 0
ng01492 Link#717114096 0 13449463 0 0
ng01492 85.176.145.31 e176145031.adsl.a12398 -17011 - -
  ALL-SYSTEMS.MCAST


mpd.conf:

default:
load PPPoE
PPPoE:
new -i ng0 PPPoE PPPoE
set iface addrs 1.1.1.1 2.2.2.2


Maybe you should delete the above line as
well. I dont remembere what iface addrs does,
but you'll get the IP addresses via IPCP,
so it's surely redundant.


set iface route default
set iface enable on-demand

Re: pppoe routing problem, default route isnt used for some hosts

2009-05-29 Thread Fabian Holler
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 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 should also without an explicit
  route for this Hosts use the default gw.
 Besides netstat -rn, you can use route get southparkstudios.com
 to check a route for a destination.
 
  Connections with nc to port 80 works
  (the connections tests are made from the router, the iface MTUs are correct)
 
 You cannot test MTU settings using nc, since initial packets, that
 is, small packets, are always smaller than your MTU. You can test
 MTU using fetch or ftp or nc + GET /some.big.file.

I only tried to say, that the connection problems couldn't be an MTU
problem. Because I tried to connect from the router(where the PPPOE
iface should have the correct MTU) and not from any
LAN-Host.

  PPPoE:
  new -i ng0 PPPoE PPPoE
  set iface addrs 1.1.1.1 2.2.2.2
 
 Maybe you should delete the above line as

That was the problem:)
I thought ip+netmask from the iface are arbitrary because they will be
overwritten after I made an successfull connection.
But the the crappy netmask was responsible for my problems

  set link mtu 1492
  set link mru 1492
 
 this is also wrong, don't try to set MTU
 or MRU. There are negotiated during PPP.
removed this also :)


regards

Fabian


pgpksnt3OWbda.pgp
Description: PGP signature


strange routing behaviour with openvpn

2009-04-24 Thread Neo [GC]

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 works... 
at least sometimes.


After my router gets a new IP, the openvpn client reconnects to the 
server and the tunnel is usable from free...@home to free...@external.
But: I have one Vista and one OSX at home, both have static routes to 
the FreeBSD-box. They are able to use the tunnel, when the 
openvpn-client is freshly startet. After getting a new IP from my ISP, 
the tunnel is up (and - as I wrote - the FreeBSD is able to use it), but 
the two other boxes don't get routed through the tunnel, but the default 
gateway. When I restart the openvpn-client, everythink works again like 
it should.


Sample output of traceroute when openvpn is restarted:
 11 ms1 ms1 ms  wintermute [192.168.2.2]
 229 ms30 ms32 ms  GOTHNET [10.10.0.1]
(works)

After router gets net external IP:
 11 ms1 ms1 ms  wintermute [192.168.2.2]
 21 ms1 ms1 ms  192.168.2.1
 319 ms19 ms19 ms  217.0.119.195
 4  217.0.89.70  meldet: Zielhost nicht erreichbar.

Any advice? :(


Regards,
Neo [GC]
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


strange routing behaviour with openvpn

2009-04-24 Thread Neo [GC]

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 works... 
at least sometimes.


After my router gets a new IP, the openvpn client reconnects to the 
server and the tunnel is usable from free...@home to free...@external.
But: I have one Vista and one OSX at home, both have static routes to 
the FreeBSD-box. They are able to use the tunnel, when the 
openvpn-client is freshly startet. After getting a new IP from my ISP, 
the tunnel is up (and - as I wrote - the FreeBSD is able to use it), but 
the two other boxes don't get routed through the tunnel, but the default 
gateway. When I restart the openvpn-client, everythink works again like 
it should.


Sample output of traceroute when openvpn is restarted:
 11 ms1 ms1 ms  wintermute [192.168.2.2]
 229 ms30 ms32 ms  GOTHNET [10.10.0.1]
(works)

After router gets net external IP:
 11 ms1 ms1 ms  wintermute [192.168.2.2]
 21 ms1 ms1 ms  192.168.2.1
 319 ms19 ms19 ms  217.0.119.195
 4  217.0.89.70  meldet: Zielhost nicht erreichbar.

Any advice? :(


Regards,
Neo [GC]

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: strange routing behaviour with openvpn

2009-04-24 Thread Chuck Swiger

Hi, Neo--

On Apr 24, 2009, at 3:26 PM, Neo [GC] wrote:
After my router gets a new IP, the openvpn client reconnects to the  
server and the tunnel is usable from free...@home to free...@external.
But: I have one Vista and one OSX at home, both have static routes  
to the FreeBSD-box. They are able to use the tunnel, when the  
openvpn-client is freshly startet. After getting a new IP from my  
ISP, the tunnel is up (and - as I wrote - the FreeBSD is able to use  
it), but the two other boxes don't get routed through the tunnel,  
but the default gateway. When I restart the openvpn-client,  
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


Regards,
--
-Chuck

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD Networking Questions / vlan, lagg, routing, FIBs, ezjail

2009-03-28 Thread Peter Cornelius

 Now, it is my suspicion that the apparent need for promisc at the router
 end indeed is an apperent one and not really the router's fault but rather
 the other end's. The other end, in this case, is the server below.
 
 If the server, with its single MIB, default-routes its packets through one
 specific of its vlans which may not be the one, at the router's end, with
 the corresponding IP network the traffic entered into the net, would it be
 possible that there's something preventing them be received? Unless there's
 promisc on, of course...
 
 I'll grab the laptop next time I think of it and have the switch monitor
 traffic to it to see what really is on the wire, maybe that helps and gives
 me a clue. I just keep forgetting the bl**dy thing each time I leave...

Ok, after a good portion of fiddling with the switch, it seems that you cannot 
copy traffic from link-aggregated ports to a monitor port on a Linksys SRW2016. 
Now out at my wits end here it seems.

I'll try the FIB approach hopefully next week then.

  - On my server, is there any way to set up individual
   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
  for up to 16 routing tables. Use the setfib command
  to select routing table for outgoing connections.
 
 So, I interpret your response as that I am correct, I have a single
 default route per FIB, and that's it. Which effectively means that I do need
 FIBs. I agree that this behaviour might make some sense :)
 
  Something like, setfib 10 jail $JAILOPTSANDARGS,
  in the jail case. You have to compile a kernel
  with the option ROUTETABLES=n. Read the message for
  revision 1.1485 from here:
  http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/conf/NOTES
 
(...)
 Generally speaking, or rather, inquiring, has anyone ever done FIBs with
 ezjail? It probably is very easy, and I consider(ed) looking into it myself
 but I currently spend about max. an hour every 2-3 days on FreeBSE so I
 don't really progress. Well, might eventually, but that'll be dunno when. But
 well, such is life, and this is pleasure not work :) and I hope to learn
 something useful on the way.
(...)
 [1]  
 http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2007-December/007331.html

Regards,

Peter.
-- 
Pt! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: 
http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger01
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >