On Fri, 2014-06-13 at 18:13 +0100, Brian Candler wrote:
> On 12/06/2014 23:06, Jon Gerdes wrote:
> > My new ISP only provides a /29 from which WAN always gets the first one
> > via PPPoE.
> >
> > I put the second address from the /29 onto an interface and the
> > remaining four onto my externally f
On 12/06/2014 23:06, Jon Gerdes wrote:
My new ISP only provides a /29 from which WAN always gets the first one
via PPPoE.
I put the second address from the /29 onto an interface and the
remaining four onto my externally facing systems.
You should be able to use the same IP address for both WAN a
On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 22:06 +, Jon Gerdes wrote:
> PS My real motivation for this is to avoid having to go back to split
> horizon DNS again which would mean resurrecting BIND and a complicated
> views setup - the horror!
>
>
> Blueloop Ltd
>
> Jon Gerdes | Senior Consultant
>
> Blueloop
On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 23:23 +0100, Chris Bagnall wrote:
> On 12/6/14 11:06 pm, Jon Gerdes wrote:
> > As far as I can tell, the only downside is I lose another address to act
> > as the gateway.
> > Can anyone spot any flaws with this method or is it a general practice?
>
> Certainly assigning the f
On 12/6/14 11:06 pm, Jon Gerdes wrote:
As far as I can tell, the only downside is I lose another address to act
as the gateway.
Can anyone spot any flaws with this method or is it a general practice?
Certainly assigning the first IP in a /29 to the PPPoE client is fairly
standard practice in t
I have recently decided to change ISP. The old one provides a /32 for
WAN via PPPoE and a routed /29 block of 8 (6 usable) from which I put
the first one on an interface and the remaining 5 on systems so they get
an externally routeable IP but with pfSense protection. This is pretty
much how IPv4
