Hello,
I am very sorry but i still have the problem.
It's working fine until router Vyatta-A sees its BGP peers and then the BGP
process crashs.
I have no problem on Vyatta-B because there is no protocol redistribution.
Case study: openmaniak.com/vyatta_case4.php
REgards
TRoopy
I think you'll find the problem is with the vmware server not passing
through the vlan tags (especially since its windows, ive never had
much luck with 801q and microsoft). i dont think that is supported.
everything looks correct except that part. do you have a desktop
machine you can run
From time to time I stumble across things written about Vyatta. I found a
nice how-to on bandwidth management and traffic shaping the other day. Those
that have been watching closely will already know that we're planning on
delivering QoS and bandwidth management in the next major release, but
Hello,
I'm new to vyatta and configuring routers. I am trying to set up a
router between our production network and a computer lab. I need it to
only allow RDP, SSH and FTP connections from the production network to
computers inside the lab. I also need it to block any traffic from the
hi, how do i define routing policies on vyatta community server 3 when i
have 2 inside networks and 2 ISPs and i want one network to use one ISP
and the other network to use the other ISP only.
second question: and it's not for this same installation, however this
one also has 2 ISPs; how do i
can i compile vyatta source code in fedora core 6 ?
Short answer is no.
Long answer is that the current build environment is Debian. We're working
to enlarge that, but it'll always be somewhat biased toward Debian-ish
systems because Vyatta uses Debian as the foundation of much of the system
I need some help here. I have hard time to change the default route. I tried
delete and commit, set (new value) and commitnothing sucessfull. Check
below. Does anyone can point out my mistake?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] show version
Baseline Version: vc3
Booted From: livecd
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
What is the purpose of the following configuration line;
tunnel 1 {
local-subnet: 192.168.0.0/24
remote-subnet: 10.40.1.0/24
Why does the tunnel has to be link to a local subnet? In fact, I may have
multiple local subnet from multiple
* I need some help here. I have hard time to change the default route.
I tried delete and commit, set (new value)
* and commitnothing sucessfull. Check below. Does anyone can point
out my mistake?
Hmm, that's odd. I just booted up a vc3 and tried the same thing:
[EMAIL
Is the next-hop ip still reachable (network still configured on the
vyatta)? If that network has gone away on the system, that route may
have been removed from the system-level routing table hence the route
doesnt exist message. I've had a similar thing happen.
--
Aubrey
1. Is VIF support NIC specific? I have a test box, with one built-in
100Mb/s forcedeth (NForce2) interface, and a couple of cheap Realtek
8169
PCI 1000Mb/s interfaces. All work fine without VIFs, but when I try to
add a VIF to the r8169 cards, the commit fails (and all subsequent
commits
Then, It seems to me that the cli should accept more than one line of
local-subnet to improve granularity on this acl. I guess I can used
0.0.0.0 for now.
Thanks Stig.
On 11/21/07, Stig Thormodsrud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Think of it as an access-list where a packet's source/destination
Think of it as an access-list where a packet's source/destination
addresses are compared to see if it should be encapsulated into the
tunnel. Those subnet commands do accept 0.0.0.0 such that anything
matches.
stig
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Just routing - you're identifying which traffic sources and
destinations that are tunneled.
Best,
Justin
On Nov 21, 2007 5:57 PM, Philippe Marcais [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is the purpose of the following configuration line;
tunnel 1 {
local-subnet:
14 matches
Mail list logo
