HI Adam,
> Or, in short: yes, just go with what Comcast wants you to do. You can
> create a separate DMZ if you want to keep the servers off your LAN, if
> necessary. It's not usually necessary unless you're running a public
> website. (Which, BTW, might violate your Comcast Terms of Service -
> -Original Message-
> From: list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org [mailto:list-
> boun...@lists.pfsense.org] On Behalf Of Jason T. Slack-Moehrle
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 1:51 PM
> To: pfSense support and discussion
> Subject: Re: [pfSense] pfSense help with creating rules
>
> HI,
> > Wai
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Jason T. Slack-Moehrle <
slackmoeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> HI,
> > Wait, are you saying I could just pay Comcast for 14 addresses and
> create a routed subnet myself and not have them do it?
> >
> > Or could I just have them create for me a 2nd IP block of 1 IP, loa
HI,
> Wait, are you saying I could just pay Comcast for 14 addresses and create a
> routed subnet myself and not have them do it?
>
> Or could I just have them create for me a 2nd IP block of 1 IP, load that on
> the modem with my block of 5 and somehow created a routed subnet from the /31
> to
> Wait, are you saying I could just pay Comcast for 14 addresses and
> create a routed subnet myself and not have them do it?
>
> Or could I just have them create for me a 2nd IP block of 1 IP, load
> that on the modem with my block of 5 and somehow created a routed
> subnet from the /31 to my /29
Hi Ryan,
> I am a little confused at how I would know if they are handing me a /29 or
> just 5 IP's?
>
> range: 75.xx.xx.25 - .29
> subnet: 255.255.255.248 (which is /29, IIRC)
> GW: 75.xx.xx.30
>
> Comcast is faster, but is not dedicated. You should always get the same
> speeds (or reasona
You could
also setup to Bridge the DMZ and WAN and run a filtered bridge setup.
__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6874 (20120210) __
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
___
- Original Message -
> From: "Jason T. Slack-Moehrle"
>
> Hi,
> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Jason T. Slack-Moehrle
> > mailto:slackmoeh...@gmail.com)> wrote:
> > > I am a little confused at how I would know if they are handing me
> > > a /29 or just 5 IP's?
> > >
> > > range: 75
Am 24.01.2012 20:08, schrieb İhsan Doğan:
>>> I'm running the NanoBSD version of pfSense, Version 2.0.1. This system
>>> was upgraded from 1.2.3 through 2.0.
>>
>> The initial 2.0 did not correctly upgrade the RRD files from 1.2.3. A
>> fix is in 2.0.1 so that upgrades from 1.2.3 work.
>>
>> Howe
Hi,
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Jason T. Slack-Moehrle
> mailto:slackmoeh...@gmail.com)> wrote:
> > I am a little confused at how I would know if they are handing me a /29 or
> > just 5 IP's?
> >
> > range: 75.xx.xx.25 - .29
> > subnet: 255.255.255.248 (which is /29, IIRC)
> > GW: 75.xx.
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Jason T. Slack-Moehrle
wrote:
> I am a little confused at how I would know if they are handing me a /29 or
> just 5 IP's?
>
> range: 75.xx.xx.25 - .29
> subnet: 255.255.255.248 (which is /29, IIRC)
> GW: 75.xx.xx.30
Comcast has routed that /29 to your cable mode
Hi Nathan,
> Anyways, didn't mean to hijack the OP! Interested to see if Comcast is
> actually handing him a /29, or just 5 IPs out of a bigger subnet, and if
> they'll route that /29 to him.
I am a little confused at how I would know if they are handing me a /29 or just
5 IP's?
range: 75.xx.x
ll have to use nat. You may be trying to avoid
this, but it seems like a much easier solution. It also seems more
flexible.
Hope this helps,
Ryan
__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6874 (20120210) __
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
- Original Message -
> From: "Nathan Eisenberg"
> To: athom...@athompso.net, "pfSense support and discussion"
>
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 2:56:36 AM
> Subject: Re: [pfSense] pfSense help with creating rules
> > I think the entire ISP operation I partly run has... three routers
>
Hi !
We have setup NAT-Redirection for a https-server. It listens on our WAN-CARP
(gw.domain.de) on TCP/443 and is forwarded to 10.x.y.z
We also have a remote location where out ISP has routed ALL traffic over IPSec
to our pfSense (phase 2 / 0.0.0.0)
The remote subnet is also NATted via outboun
On 10-2-2012 12:08, Michel Servaes wrote:
> Goede middag,
>
> Kan u dit mail adres schrappen om te mailen aub.
>
> Hartelijke groeten,
>
>
> ___
> List mailing list
> List@lists.pfsense.org
> http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Ik stel voo
Goede middag,
Kan u dit mail adres schrappen om te mailen aub.
Hartelijke groeten,
___
List mailing list
List@lists.pfsense.org
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Hello,
I'm using pfSense 2.0.1, amd64 flavor.
Try to setup RIPv2 on this system, but it does not work: pfSense 2.0.1 seems to
be
unable to send RIPv2 multicast announces to 224.0.0.9.
Here my config and several tests I've performed.
* my setup: multicast setup seems to be fine on this syste
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 6:34 AM, Nathan Eisenberg
wrote:
>
> Well, if you want to get technical, the minimum possible subnet in IPv4 over
> Ethernet is actually a /31. $employer uses these religiously in PtP Ethernet
> links, and they work flawlessly. Unfortunately, *BSD doesn't seem to
> imp
19 matches
Mail list logo
