similar to: No Nat problem

Hello, I have a Debian-Woody-3.0 Router with 3 NIC''s. Kernelversion 2.4.18 +------------+ +-------------+ | | | | |192.168.1.1 | | 192.168.2.1 | | DSL-Router | | ISDN-Router | +------------+ +-------------+ | |

Hello Im having a problem similar to sawar Here is my configuration --------------eth1---192.168.1.128---------- -------------192.168.1.1 ISP router 1 | my | ---Eth0---192.168.10.157----| | | linux |

Hi all, I have a network like this : Provider 1 Provider 2 \ / \ / \ / eth1 \ / eth2 ------------- | | | | | | | | | | | eth0 | ------------- | | | | 2 networks : -

Hi all, i got the following configuration: * NET1: DSL Line with /28 network, let''s call it 10.1.0.0/28 * NET2: DSL Line with /28 network, let''s call it 10.2.0.0/28 * INTNET: Internal Network with productive servers and workstations, 192.168.1.0/24 Obvisiously the 10er networks are official networks but censored to protect my customer. The routerbox assigns on eth0 all

Hello list, I am in the process of switching from IPCOP to Shorewall s the firewall for our small office. I very much like the fact that Shorewall runs on top of the same OS (openSuSE 11.4) that I run on the server and my desktop. Our setup is fairly straightforward. We have 8 static ip addresses from our ISP, which provides a cable modem and a Cisco 800 series router. The ip addresses are

I''m using a 2.6.20-15-ubuntu (shipped with feisty) kernel with Julian''s patches applied and it''s my 3rd day with tc, ip, ifconfig and the rest ;). Got 2 ADSL uplinks. What I need is an ability to manually configure uplink usage, so nothing like bonding by default. Failover is meant to be provided via a shell script at the next step. Here is my config: == # no need for

Hello, I''m trying to achieve the following. 2 ISP''s and 1 LAN with failover. So, when 1 internet connection fails the other need to take over. I''m aware of the restrictions. The current sessions are lost. I did this before, one and a half year ago or something. But at that router wasn''t failover. Now i''ve read the nano howto and followed it.

Hello Shorewall list, I''m a happy Shorewall user since a few years now and everything works fine for me except one thing that I try to implement since a week, the multi-isp. I''ve downloaded the 2.4.0 Stable release yesterday and tried the RC2 since a week. My config is a Debian running a kernel 2.4.27 home made with the CONNMARK.diff patch applied I''m using 2 ISP,

I have a gentoo 2.6.14 box with 4 nics, LAN/DMZ/PUB1/PUB2 LAN and DMZ have a 1918 /22 each, PUB1 and PUB2 have a /29 each of which 5 ips are assigned. Using the mangle table, I give all packets a mark (according to local policies) in the range 1-10. Using ip rule, i pass marks 1-5 through the pub1 route table, and marks 6-10 through the pub2 routing table. Using the nat table, I SNAT to one

Hello, I need some help about a routing problem on a complex configuration. The problem is that I can''t reach from services outside from my DMZ. The scenario is a gateway linked to three internet connections, so that I used three distinct iproute2 tables for routing. The gw is running ipvs for balancing over the dmz''s servers. DMZ servers are on 192.168.1.0/24 network, .

Hi, I''m completly lost with vlan and route configuration on my debian. This is my architecture : eth1.401 eth1.2338 eth2 Voice Vlan Public IP Local Network 10.150.11.90 84.16.x.x 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.240 255.255.255.128

Hello Shorewall gurus, I have a dilemma with a public server. I want to migrate the current public server over to a new machine behind the current server''s firewall (shorewall 1.4). I have included a diagram below to help explain the target network I am working toward. I have read the shorewall online documentation and though I have used Shorewall the past 4 years in the current

Hi guys, Can you take a look at this? :) +-----------+ | | eth1-|- | | -|-eth0---LAN--- | | eth2-|- | | | +-----------+ - eth0 is connected to the LAN having the IP=LAN_IP eth1 is connected to the first ISP having IP=ISP_IP_1 and GW=ISP_GW_1 eth2 is connected to the second ISP having IP=ISP_IP_2 and GW=ISP_GW_2 I need

I have multihome network line. I want to use multi gateway, but i have some trouble +-----------------------+ | 30.1.1.1 (eth0) | <----> 10.1.1.1 ( eth1) < ---> internet | | | 10.1.1.2 (eth1) | | | <----> 20.1.1.1 (eth2) < ---> internet | 20.1.1.2

here''s the setup (two dsl - same provider) +-----> link1 LAN----- linux box --| |----------internet +-----> link2 the setup is ok in terms of the failover requirement. the other link takes over when one is down. however, there is a very noticeable lag when both lines are up. i''ve tried changing

Hi, I have a computer which is used as router/firewall/VPN with four network card. One connected on the LAN (br0, 10.0.0.0/24), the three others to three different ISP, eth0 192.168.1.0/29, eth1 192.168.0.0/24, eth2 192.168.2.0/29. This computer is under Linux 2.6.11 with the Julian Anastasov routes patch. The configuration by default is to balance the load on the three interfaces. Then, I

I have a setup where I have three NIC in a Debian box. I have eth1 conected to internet and eth0 NAT''ed to 192.168.1.1. eth1 and eth2 are bridged together, given ip 192.168.122.2. What I want to achieve is to perform traffic shaping on the bridge as well as prioritizing the traffic from eth0 very low. (This is from trental flat ...) However it seems that I am unable to perform thhe

Hello, i have had a terribe day today, why? because i have been so 4 or 5 hours trying to do work this and i have not finished it. I feel very pleased if anything can help me. I have two isp connections: eth0: dhcp ip1: 82.198.*.* gw1: 82.198.*.* and a router adsl in ip 192.168.0.253: eth1: static ip2: 192.168.0.254 gw1: 192.168.0.253 the same machine has 3 more networks cards but i am

Beta 1 is now available at: http://www.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta ftp://ftp.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta Features include: 1) An OLD_PING_HANDLING option has been added to shorewall.conf. When set to Yes, Shorewall ping handling is as it has always been (see http://www.shorewall.net/ping.html). When OLD_PING_HANDLING=No, icmp echo (ping) is handled via rules and

Shorewall 1.3.14 is now available. Thanks go to Francesca Smith for helping with updating the sample configurations. New in 1.3.14: 1) An OLD_PING_HANDLING option has been added to shorewall.conf. When set to Yes, Shorewall ping handling is as it has always been (see http://www.shorewall.net/ping.html). When OLD_PING_HANDLING=No, icmp echo (ping) is handled via rules and