search for: wan0

Hi, I have a suspicious problem with multiple uplinks configuration. First of all my configuration: 1) kernel 2.6.20.3 2) iptables 1.3.7 3) last iproute (for masked marks) All wan interfaces are bridged (stp disabled) in only one interface (wan0), all lan interfaces are bridged (stp enabled) in only one interface (zlan0). The wan0 bridge is to allow UPnP works. To allow related incoming traffic from one fisical interface I mark connections, and the same to allow outgoing related. The routing rules are the same than lartc documentation p...

...for this test is: 1) linux box with 2.6.19.1 kernel (SMP machine) with these patches/modules: a) l7-filter b) ipp2p c) connlimit d) set 2) 4 ethernet interfaces: a) 2 external (eth1 and eth3) interfaces with balanced links (as described in nato-howto) bridged as wan0 with static IPs assigned to wan0 and wan0:1 b) 2 internal ineterfaces (eth0 and eth2) in bridge zlan0 with STP enabled and configured. IPTABLES relevant configuration: # iptables -t nat -vn -L POSTROUTING Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 185 packets, 16649 bytes) pkts bytes target prot...

...with ebtables without success either. Is there some relatively easy way to make the bridge forward everything and not cut off the transmit after a single packet? / Here is what one end of the link looks like. // // +-------------+ // /// /// + eth0 +---+ bridge 1 +---+ wan0 ---> Transmit // | +-------------+ // | //switch--+ // | +-------------+ // + eth0 +---+ bridge 2 +---+ wan0 <--- Receive // +-------------+ / The WAN side uses a synchrono...

Hi, could anyone provides any example about the use of ip route command to force the use of one route using masks in the mark? The configuration is: 1 LAN (zlan0) iface N WAN (wan0 ... wanN) ifaces with static IPs and load balanced. iptables 1.3.7 kernel 2.6.19.2 iproute 2.6.19 I''m yet setting marks into packets for QoS and its working, I now want to set some bits (OR) at the end of the mark. For example, I want to use 0x8000 to add another mark to the pac...

Opps! After reading the email below I noticed something in ''ifconfig''. The wireless interface is ''wlan0'' not ''wan0''. I modified the wireless interface in /etc/shorewall/interface to wlan0 started shorewall I can connect eo the INTERNET with shorewall running Horace From: Horace Franklin Jr <horacef@usnetizen.com> Reply-to: hora...

...ght and working, and the interfaces are set up right and working, but shorewall is somehow TKOing everything (I think) :(. did I miss a crucial config somewhere? is there more I need to do to handle a bridge device in ubuntu (my interfaces looks liek this:) auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto wan0 iface wan0 inet dhcp auto lan0 iface lan0 inet static address 10.0.0.254 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 10.0.0.0 broadcast 10.0.0.255 auto lan1 iface lan1 inet static address 10.0.1.254 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 10.0.1.0 b...

...convinced myself (maybe incorrectly) that I most likely need some sort of advanced NAT/routing setup. Below is a description of the networks involved: Local net (192.168.101.0/24) | | Linux machine eth1 (192.168.101.5)---- eth1:0 (10.140.227.245) | Iptables NAT/firewall | Linux machine wan0 (This is a sangoma wanpipe with a routable ip address) | ISP The 10.140.227.224/27 network is a private network that knows nothing about the 192.168.101.0/24 network and is not controlled by us. Previously they were run as 2 seperate networks. What we are trying to do is to be able to install...

...ddle. with 3 routers, the load balancing configurations shouldn''t change, just ip addresses there is a discussion of how to use DNAT (port forwarding) at http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/dgd-usage.txt with dead gateway detection xx.xx.xx.x1/32--->SHDSL#1 (wan0)/ xx.xx.xx.x2/32 server(s) ------> Switch -------> (lan0) Linux Router -- ex. LAMP Server ip 192.168.1.1/28 (wan1)\ ip 192.168.1.2/28 yy.yy.yy.y1/32--->SHDSL#2 gw 192.168.1.1 yy.yy.yy.y2/32 ip...

Hi all! After that good thread "DGD patch not detecting dead gateway" I was able to set up a Load Balancing with ping based DGD (without Julian Anastasov patch). But now I''m facing a new problem and tried some options, with only partial solutions. I made a script based on http://www.mail-archive.com/lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl/msg16257.html (Thank you Manish Kathuria),

...will jump to ppp1 for example) post of my config files: interfaces: #NET net0 ppp0 detect tcpflags,dhcp,routefilter,nosmurfs net1 ppp1 detect tcpflags,dhcp,routefilter,nosmurfs net2 ppp2 detect tcpflags,dhcp,routefilter,nosmurfs net3 ppp3 detect tcpflags,dhcp,routefilter,nosmurfs #WAN wan0 eth0 detect tcpflags,routefilter,nosmurfs wan1 eth1 detect tcpflags,routefilter,nosmurfs wan2 eth2 detect tcpflags,routefilter,nosmurfs wan3 eth3 detect tcpflags,routefilter,nosmurfs dmz eth8 detect # LOCAL loc eth9 detect tcpflags,nosmurfs,detectnets # VLAN v10 vlan10 detect tcpflags,nos...

I think we discussed this in the past and I floated a hack at the time, but I don''t recall any real resolution. I want to see if time has solved my problem or if it still exists. My scenario is that I have two ISPs, one of which uses DHCP. Because I have two ISPs, history has shown that allowing the provisioning script for the interface to plumb a default route is troublesome and

...----- ### lan0 ### tcq="tc qdisc add dev lan0" tcc="tc class add dev lan0" $tcq root handle 10: htb $tcc parent 10: classid 10:1 htb rate 100000Kbit # LAN $tcc parent 10:1 classid 10:10 htb rate 80000Kbit ceil 100000Kbit prio 7 $tcq parent 10:10 sfq limit 50 perturb 1 # from wan0 $tcc parent 10:1 classid 10:11 htb rate 2048Kbit prio 3 # from wan1 $tcc parent 10:1 classid 10:12 htb rate 10000Kbit prio 3 ### lan0 - from wan0 ### tcq="tc qdisc add dev lan0" tcc="tc class add dev lan0" $tcq parent 10:11 handle 1: htb $tcc parent 1: classid 1:1 htb rate 204...

I need to change the host name on a test server, and in the past when I used hostname to change the hostname, it did not seem to change it everywhere. I really don't want to do a rebuild just yet, but I have to feel confident that hostname is really changed (reboot is not too much of an issue). What is the recommened practice? Other than get it right the first time.

The situation is this: INTERNET -- ROUTER -- ETHERNET+WIFI -- PC's The conection between INTERNET and ROUTER is done with 2 LINKs with static IP's. The conection between ROUTER and PC's is done via ETHERNET lan with many bridges and ACCESSPOINTS. The PC's are in a IP subnet, the BRIDGES in another IP subnet, the AP's in another IP subnet. The ROUTER has 1 bridge interface

...r 16 16:02:25 hypervisor3 kernel: [2441115.679766] RSP <ffff880f79a57c30> Apr 16 16:02:25 hypervisor3 kernel: [2441115.679803] CR2: 00000000000008b8 Apr 16 16:02:25 hypervisor3 kernel: [2441115.680261] ---[ end trace af1c02984d34edeb ]--- Apr 16 16:02:25 hypervisor3 kernel: [2441115.681500] wan0: port 16(vif17.0) entering forwarding state