similar to: Bridging two subnets selectively using routing

Not normally a question for this group, but you guys are very bridge/router/firewall savvy, so I thought I''d toss it here. I have a bridge. On one side of the bridge is that fancy thing called the Internet. On the other side is my LAN. The bridge is the obvious demarcation line and a good place to put a firewall. Now, I have all my iptables stuff planned out, EXCEPT for nat. The

I know this is not a normal request, but I would like to connect two vlans into the same box that have the same subnet on them, and then NAT them out to the Internet. We don''t need to make any connections inbound to them, but only provide outbound access. Any suggestions on how to do this? If I can''t do it with routing then I could use something like user-mode Linux, or other

Is it possible to connect networks with different masks together? For example a 10.26.0.0/16 subnet with a 192.168.117.0/24 subnet. See this thread for more details... https://forum.netgate.com/topic/134218/tinc-initial-setup

Is it even possible or even worth while to do layer 3 switching (bridging) on a Linux system? Or would this be considered routing even though everything is done on OSI Layer 2? Which would be faster, Layer 3 switching (bridging) on OSI Layer 2 or routing on OSI Layer 3? Grant. . . .

I added a virtual interface eth0:1 on one of my machines and suddenly networking breaks on startup of the system (eth0 is gone) when xend starts and runs the network-bridge script. This is supposed to be fixed according to: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi I checked and the network-bridge script contains this fix. It works fine on one of my PCs when eth0:1 is added, but not on this

Hello again, I may have a common problem to solve but it seems it is harder than I thought... I have 2 internet providers (each one having a different gateway). Behind the router there are around 100 clients that are SNAT-ed. I want some clients to be SNAT-ed to the first provider, while the others to the second one. The following lines should work: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s

Many thanks for the help to date. I now have a working vpn with three nodes: 10.20.30.1 10.20.40.1 10.20.50.1 Each machine can see each other machine 100's of miles apart from each other. Each machine is behind its own router. The machines are on their own subnets, as well, of course. The individual IP's on the lans of the nodes are: 192.168.0.155 (corresponds to 10.20.30.1)

WOW! OK! The light bulb above my head just came on. I added the script to the Subnet Up Script section, and now all the routes I need have been added in to the table for me. I did have to modify the line a little since I'm using pfSense (FreeBSD). I changed it to... route add "$SUBNET" -iface "$INTERFACE" ...I also used... route del "$SUBNET" -iface

I''m not subscribed to the users list but I''ve been reading the archives. The OP should NOT try using bridging with either FC 3 or FC 4 at this time because the combination of Netfilter and bridging is currently broken in the kernel''s included with those distros (as reported in another thread on the list). -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently

I just found that the VPN Netmask option in the pfSense tinc GUI is related to the "netmask" option in /usr/local/etc/tinc/tinc-up ifconfig $INTERFACE 192.168.117.1 netmask 255.255.0.0 What exactly is this line doing? Is it assigning the address that my lan adapter has to the tunnel interface as well? I'm interested in using tinc in production, so I'm trying to learn as much

On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, David Summers wrote: > Thanks for the great software package! The question I have is this: Thank you :) > My goal is to set up a triangle topology VPN between three sites and run > OSPF routing on all the sites so that if a link goes down between any two > sites the OSPF routing will reroute the packets that used to go between > the sites A <-> B to A

I''m being cast headlong into unfamiliar waters here, and being desperate for some air, thought I''d come here for some help. :) Anyway, my employer is going through some whiplash-inducing growth spurts, and as a result, the simple "Internet T-1 -> Linux Firewall/NAT -> LAN" setup just isn''t going to cut it anymore. First, we''re bringing in 2

Dear members of the R Development Team, I am looking for people with a deep understanding of R internals to assist in bridging R to OpenOffice. While R is a state of the art statistical environment, less experienced users often find it difficult to work with R. Therefore, I believe that a bridge between R and a spreadsheet program will make this transition less painful. I sincerely believe

I'm looking for some information regarding the interaction of KVM, VLANs, firewalld, and the kernel's forwarding configuration. I would appreciate input especially from anyone already running a similar configuration in production. In short, I'm trying to figure out if a current configuration is inadvertently opening up traffic across network segments. On earlier versions of CentOS

hi list, oh it''s not really a problem. Each time i fire shorewall, i run a custom iptables script: (for the openvpn machines to have route back from my bridge/fw - $SOURCEIP is the ip of my OpenVPN/Fw/bridge) iptables -A POSTROUTING -t nat -s 10.8.0.0/16 -j SNAT --to-source $SOURCEIP i wish to better integrate it within shorewall, so is there any config files that could achieve the

hi list, i need help i have two links LINK 1 Internet Linux ---- LAN LINK 2 i need that the traffic web goes to link 2 i use squid in the linux with transparent proxy i´ve tried to use squid parameter "tcp_outgoing_address" but it doesnt work. best regards -- --------------------------------------------------- Fabio S. Silva

Hello guys I have a subnet with 255 users, which need to share 1 single slow internet connection, so i would like to implement a kind of *fair queuing *on the UPLOAD between them, which means that they all share the connection equally.. The tools that i have available is: A linux box with IPROUTE2,HTB and TC.. I have looked at some examples, and my first idea was to make 255 entries in

Hi, I just set up tinc between two hosts (for now). All seems to work fine, but now I run in to a routing issue: I gave both of my vpn routers an IP in the 172.16.100.0/24 range, and used the Subnet-directive to inform tinc of this. This works fine, I can ping both hosts from both sides of the vpn. Ofcourse both vpn routers give access to other subnets, but they don't know the IP-ranges

The bridging documentation (http://shorewall.net/2.0/bridge.html) has been expanded and there is a refresh of the bridging code (ftp://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Bridging and http://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Bridging). -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net

Dear all, I am trying to configure a basic TINC vpn between two sites using OpenWRT routers. The link seems to work, the ping between the two routers is ok, but I can't ping hosts between the subnets behind the routers. This is the configuration: ======== SITE 1 (CLIENT) - polimnia (subnet 192.168.4.0/24, gw 192.168.4.1) tinc.conf ------------- Name = polimnia ConnectTo = calliope