similar to: Two class C subnets...

So i was playing around with Samba multi channel and it was not working as i originally expected it. I have two hosts: my workstation running up to date Windows 10 with 2 interfaces my server running Gentoo with Samba 4.5.4 with 2 interfaces (all connected to the same network) workstation has IPs 192.168.2.114, 192.168.2.115 server has 192.168.2.16(enp2s0f0),192.168.2.17(enp2s0f1) i'm

Hi, This is the first time I write to the list. My english is not so good, but I hope I''ll be understood. I have 4 adsl routers, plugged on a linux box, and this box e used to connect to a local network. The linux box has 5 NICs. eth0: local network inet 10.0.0.56/24 brd 10.0.0.255 scope global eth0 eth1: adsl router 1 inet 192.168.254.1/24 brd 192.168.254.255 scope global

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

Hello all, I am having issues getting my virtual network to work correctly. As of current, I have set up a virtual network with virt-manager, using the routed mode to forward network traffic. I have found guests can see/ping themselves, the host's virtual IP and the host's real IP, but nothing else. Guests fail to see any other device on the real network or the internet. My host is Arch

Comments below: On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Reindl Harald via samba < samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > first keep your mail on the list and only the list > > it makes me tired when people deliver denugging infos in pieces Me too. :) > - what about "telnet host port" A telnet server is not running. I think that's why you don't see it. > - what

I''m having trouble routing on high fwmarks, I want to use a lot of different marks for 2 routes so that I can QoS based on the marks ip rule looks like this: 0: from all lookup local 32751: from all fwmark 31 lookup dslout 32752: from all fwmark 30 lookup dslout 32753: from all fwmark 29 lookup dslout 32754: from all fwmark 28 lookup dslout 32755: from

Dear all, I''ve the following problem with routing + NAT: If I''ve two ISP and I''m using two nexthop in default route with MASQUERADE on both ISP links, I see routing cache regenerated, but sometimes packets sent to a new link (after cache regeneration) uses wrong source address for masquerading. Here is the config. I''ve two links to outside via two

Hi all, I need to route local generated packages depending on which tcp or udp service I need to use. To accomplish this I have configured two routing tables: [root at lothlorien ~]# ip ru ls 0: from all lookup 255 32762: from all fwmark 0x2 lookup FirstLan 32763: from all fwmark 0x1 lookup SecondLan 32764: from 172.25.80.10 lookup SecondLan 32765: from 172.25.70.18 lookup FirstLan

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi! I''ve setup some routing tables, but how can I delete them? currently it looks like that, but how I delete the tables stuebi and notebook and how the entry in the main table. thx for your help. Babylon5:~# ip rule ls 0: from all lookup local 32759: from 10.149.19.168 lookup stuebi 32760: from 10.149.17.72 lookup stuebi 32761:

"A Tale of TTL Troubles" I was hired to implement VPN for a subnet. The owner has a /27 at his home site, and he wanted to have the machines there answering BOTH on those IP addresses and some addresses at a remote colocation provider. Make sense? Not to me either. :( I think he''s trying to fool his customers into thinking he has a physical presence in the colocation city.

Hi, I have a problem with my script. I have a debian with a kernel 2.6.8 patched with patch-2.6.8-ja1.diff of nano.txt site. I have 3 internet connections : - eth1 : - ip : 192.168.8.75 - gw : 192.168.8.73 - eth2 : - ip : 192.168.1.200 - gw : 192.168.1.2 - eth3 : - ip : 192.168.2.200 - gw : 192.168.2.1 and my eth0 for

Hi Ppl I have 5 adsl lines that after reading quite a bit i managed to get load balanced now abvoiusly it doesnt load balance evenly and this works on what routes are still in the routing cache. my question is my outbound masquerading had to be modified to use snat in iptables instead of just plain masquerading my outbound masquerading now works but my inbound port forwarding doesnt work would

Hi. The task: 1. There 3 servers and a router with 2 PPPoE connections (let call them: ppp0, ppp1). 2. There are several groups of Inet-clients to be served (Servers, Clients and Club). 3. The task is: - to route Club through the ppp1; - to Servers and Clients through ppp0; (Next is reproduced from memory and may be slightly incorrect) router # netstat -nr Kernel IP routing table

Hi to everybody, I write because I have just configure a shorewall to be used as firewall, proxy(with squid) and gateway to 2 internet connections, and it looks to work properly but now I''d like to add a new feature: I would to redirect some specific traffic (emule''s one) only to one of those links. This is my diagram:

I need to add persistent routes to a policy routing table. I can add rules to an IP policy table after installing NetworkManager-config- routing-rules; but I have not found how to add routes to a table other than the specific table. Manually I do a: ip route add default via 192.168.1.6 dev ens192 table pods Rules load automatically via the /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/rules- {interface}

http://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=814 Summary: rpfilter blocks broadcast packets Product: netfilter/iptables Version: unspecified Platform: x86_64 OS/Version: Gentoo Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: ip_tables (kernel) AssignedTo: netfilter-buglog at

Hello all, I''m writing to the list, because I have a problem setting up my routing that I''m unable to overcome. 1. The situation: +-------------+ +-------------+ | actaea | eth0 | ilex | | 192.168.1.4 |------ localnet ------| 192.168.1.1 | +-------------+ 192.168.1.0/24 +-------------+

I have a 2.6.12(ubuntu-patchset), kernel recompiled with this routing options: [*] IP: advanced router [*] IP: policy routing [*] IP: equal cost multipath Load balancing is working great, but i have problems whits long term tcp flows (like msn-messenger or vpns or any other type of long term ip based conection). I assume this is because after a period of time, the per-host

Hi, after trying for days I ended up with a working tinc configurazion of 2 subnets, now my goal is to add 2 more subnets and comunicate. I might seem dumb at this point but honestly I don't work in IT or Networking stuff, and so I dont have that deep knowledge. A little explanation of my configuration is HOST A (VPN server) Public IP: 1.2.3.4 tun0 Subnet = 192.168.10.0/24 tun0 IP =

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=814 Florian Westphal <fw at strlen.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fw at strlen.de --- Comment #1 from Florian Westphal <fw at strlen.de> 2013-04-12 10:24:14 CEST --- (In reply