search for: bradeyh

To rephrase the question, "Can I use masquerading and proxy ARP in the same zone simultaneously?" It''s not a stupid question--I couldn''t see any reason why it wouldn''t work, but I had actually try it out to convince myself that it did (which isn''t a bad thing to do before posting the question to the list, by the way). In any case, the answer is

...here: https://www.shorewall.net/pipermail/shorewall-users/2002-June/001702.html I''d make the standard complaint that you should have googled the list yourself, but I found it difficult to get Google to find the message, even though I knew it was there. Searching for <"spt=53" bradeyh> pulled it up, but <"spt 53" shorewall-users> didn''t, at least until I clicked on "repeat the search with the omitted results included." That seems weird--is Google having problems? - Bradey -----Original Message----- From: John S. Andersen [mailto:jsa@nor...

>From http://shorewall.net/ProxyARP.htm (and the Setup Guide): > A word of warning is in order here. ISPs typically configure their > routers with a long ARP cache timeout. If you move a system from > parallel to your firewall to behind your firewall with Proxy ARP, it > will probably be HOURS before that system can communicate with the > internet. You can call your ISP and ask

Hmm--either the indexing process is still running, or it''s broken again. It''s 0443 GMT, and I can''t get the search engine to find anything on the mailing list or the web site (I used ''dns'' as my search term). It''s not that big of an inconvenience, though--Googling for ''site:shorewall.net dns'' does pretty much the same thing.

That log message looks like someone (or some program) is trying to browse to moreover.com from your web server machine--it''s not a reply to an external request. You''d see messages like that if you were running some sort of HTTP proxy server (like Squid) on that box (although they''d likely be to multiple IPs, unless your users only browsed to p.moreover.com). It could

Hi, I am trying to configure the SMTP service on DMZ host. Added the rule: ACCEPT wan dmz:66.58.99.84 tcp pop3 - ACCEPT wan dmz:66.58.99.84 tcp 25 - ACCEPT dmz:66.58.99.84 wan tcp 25 - ACCEPT dmz:66.58.99.84 wan tcp pop3 - issued shorewall clear, shorewall restart, but still couldn''t telnet to the mail server

While I''m in temporary retirement, I''ve decided spend a little time experimenting with new things and making some updates to the web site. The biggest result of this effort to date has been: http://shorewall.sf.net/Shorewall_Squid_Usage.html This outlines how to use Squid as a transparent proxy running on the firewall, in the DMZ or in the local network. In the latter two

Tom Eastep wrote: > On Mon, 2005-01-03 at 15:22 -0800, Boyd Kelly (Coast Systems) wrote: > > Thanks for such a quick reply Tom! > > > > Any suggestions then as to what I might do other than > putting a second > > nic in the SBS and opening it up for web access? I don''t > like the idea, > > but since MS SBS includes fireall that is actually what