similar to: VPN traceroute is not consistent/ Bind cannot transfer

Hi, I have the following setup. Two linux systems with two [test] external interfaces encrypted with ipsec [transport]. Two gre tunnels that pass 10.200.0.0/24 and 10.200.1.0/24 network traffic. Testing the balanced tunnels I would setup iptraf on one and ping from the other. The results would be as expected; traffic would be split between the two interfaces. Testing with an ftp transfer of

Hi, I have the following setup. Two linux systems with two [test] external interfaces encrypted with ipsec [transport]. Two gre tunnels that pass 10.200.0.0/24 and 10.200.1.0/24 network traffic. Testing the balanced tunnels I would setup iptraf on one and ping from the other. The results would be as expected; traffic would be split between the two interfaces. Testing with an ftp transfer of

Hi, I have the following setup. Two linux systems with two [test] external interfaces encrypted with ipsec [transport]. Two gre tunnels that pass 10.200.0.0/24 and 10.200.1.0/24 network traffic. Testing the balanced tunnels I would setup iptraf on one and ping from the other. The results would be as expected; traffic would be split between the two interfaces. Testing with an ftp transfer of

Hi, I have a problem with GRE tunneling. I read Advanced-Routing HOWTO about this and I did all as is written in this documentation. Even the same example is here which I need for my project. I want create (by means of GRE tunneling or IP in IP tunneling) virtual private network VPN - in first phase without IPsec in other phase with IPsec. I have two local networks distant apart with two routers.

Hi, I have a client connected to the ''net through 3 ISP''s. Have set up a Linux box to do routing and load sharing for the 3 connections. A fourth interface is connected to the LAN with private IP addresses. Am using iptables to SNAT traffic to the appropriate IP depending on the interface the packet gets routed onto. The setup looks something like this: Interface IP

Hello everyone, I have a problem regarding gre tunneling, I have two linux box both of them has a private network and the linux A is connected to the internet via wireless radio and the other linux B is connected to the internet via lease line. Here is the setup of my two linux box Linux A eth0 = 203.189.x.1 (internet) eth1 = 192.168.1.1 (going to hub private network) Linux B eth0 = 205.198.x.1

hi all, We are using squid 25s1 with kernel 2.4.19 and iproute2(+julian''s Pathes) with the following acl.. acl short_path dst 128.0.0.0/8 tcp_outgoing_address myIp2nd short_path we are linked to 2 isp--one having satelite & the other OFC. We want the above mentioned network to go thru OFC(ispB) as the sibling resides there. But when i use squidclient mgr:server_list

I need to send multicast traffic through a GRE tunnel between two Linux routers. The tunnel works for normal IP packets, but I can''t see how to make it work for multicast. Here''s the setup: 10.10.10.0/24 LAN-B--------------RtrB-------------RtrC--------------LAN-C 192.168.2.0/24 192.168.1.0/24 RtrB interfaces: eth0

Martin, If I understand whay you are suggesting, there is a problem in your design: It will only work if you use Hide NAT. The problem is that the ip_src == IP0 rule is wrong: The ip_src is not changed by the router and it is not equal to the IP of any of the machine interfaces. Can you think of a solution that will work in the following reasonabl scenario: Lets say I have two T1 internet

Hi, I am tring to us ip route to load balance between two interfaces. ip route add equalize 10.200.1.0/24 nexthop via 10.200.0.2 dev neta nexthop via 10.200.0.2 dev neta2 Where neta and neta2 are gre tunnels. Testing show that packets travel in a single sided manner. Do I need to use the multipath (IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_CACHED) module? thx jason

Hola de nuevo R-Users, me he dejado cosas para aclara. Primero de todo tengo cinco repeticiones y 20 missings, así que mi n es de 5×10×3×5-20= 730 datos en total, todos los grupos tienen al menos 3 representantes. Segundo: Las variables estudiadas son Producción neta, Peso de 100 semillas y Proteína. Tercero: Observo los mismos genotipos (G) en varios años (A) en las misma localidades

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> I have an Asterisk 1.4.18 with a mix of cordless phones connected using Linksys SPA2102 ATAs and Cisco 7940G

Hi, I am setting up a firewall on CENTOS 4.4. I have done default block iptables -P INPUT DROP iptables -P FORWARD DROP iptables -P OUTPUT DROP I have enabled ICMP to www.google.com iptables -A OUTPUT -p icmp -d 64.233.189.104 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p icmp -s 64.233.189.104 -j ACCEPT Ping works fine as below [root at firebox rc.d]# ping 64.233.189.104 PING 64.233.189.104 (

Neil, Doesn't look like my original message made it to the mailing list so here you are. ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: Re: Fwd: [CentOS] HOW to enable traceroute with IPTABLES Date: Sat February 17 2007 10:07 From: Robert Spangler <lazydog at zoominternet.net> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> On Sat February 17 2007 03:11, Indunil Jayasooriya

Hello, I''m having a very strange problem concerning traceroute and routing and didn''t know if lartc or netfilter would be the correct choice for asking. (so sorry if my question is misplaced) I have the following setup: public ip -- gw1 -- 172.16.0.1 --- 172.16.0.2/and public ip''s --- gw2 --- switch --users (public and private ip addresses; ip-user-pub) from the

CentOS Errata and Enhancement Advisory 2011:0469 Upstream details at : http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-0469.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) i386: 8d044975056f6e1f7485a62cd8309f49 traceroute-2.0.1-6.el5.i386.rpm Source: 12a273e76a16f11869981bde05d35831 traceroute-2.0.1-6.el5.src.rpm -- Johnny Hughes

CentOS Errata and Enhancement Advisory 2011:0469 Upstream details at : http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-0469.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) x86_64: 55faf2478a5db7379ef455523f2e0cad traceroute-2.0.1-6.el5.x86_64.rpm Source: 12a273e76a16f11869981bde05d35831 traceroute-2.0.1-6.el5.src.rpm -- Johnny

CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2011:0469 Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-0469.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) i386: f6e26bd969eaa53861500b22804f140a traceroute-2.0.1-6.el5.i386.rpm Source: a44d3ee8852b4931e777680e97602cc4 traceroute-2.0.1-6.el5.src.rpm -- Karanbir Singh

CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2011:0469 Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-0469.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( md5sum Filename ) x86_64: 9b2f0df9e44e596cec2585e413847f8d traceroute-2.0.1-6.el5.x86_64.rpm Source: a44d3ee8852b4931e777680e97602cc4 traceroute-2.0.1-6.el5.src.rpm -- Karanbir

Hi everybody, Right now, we are blocking pings and traceroutes to our website. But, in order for our members to test the connection when they are experiencing slow browsing, we are thinking about unblocking them... Are there still any security issues (flooding, etc...) in enabling them or is that an old problem fixed a long time ago? Thanks, JD