similar to: Routing for multiple uplinks/providers problem.

Doing routing based on this: http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html Have done it for over a year. Tried a new 2.6.15 kernel. Firewall is based on debian sarge. Most things work ok dnat snat etc. Can simultaneous ssh in to an internal host via both isps with no problems. At the moment the default route is via eth2. root@fonroute:~# ip rule 0: from all lookup local 200:

I just recompiled a plain vanilla 2.4.28 kernel, and used the Shorewall.net kernel config as a guideline. For some reason, I get this: Nov 30 12:05:34 fw shorewall: Shorewall has detected the following iptables/netfilter capabilities: Nov 30 12:05:34 fw shorewall: NAT: Available Nov 30 12:05:34 fw shorewall: Packet Mangling: Available Nov 30 12:05:34 fw shorewall: Multi-port Match:

I am working on a split route and ShoreWall system. I reviewed the lartc documentation but have a few areas that I still need help on. Here is my network: 64.xxx.xxx.1/25 66.xxx.xxx.129/26 | | ################################################# # Eth2 64.xxx.xxx.2 eth0 66.xxx.xxx.130 # #

Hi. Contents: 1) Introduction 2) 2 Questions * Introduction: I used this HOWTO to use multiple providers. http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html The box is a load balancer, using the Linux Virtual Server. We have a problem with lost connections, and it seems you get issues when you combine this setup with DNAT [1]. The proposed solution [1] is to use these rules to mark

Hi, I have a suspicious problem with multiple uplinks configuration. First of all my configuration: 1) kernel 2.6.20.3 2) iptables 1.3.7 3) last iproute (for masked marks) All wan interfaces are bridged (stp disabled) in only one interface (wan0), all lan interfaces are bridged (stp enabled) in only one interface (zlan0). The wan0 bridge is to allow UPnP works. To allow related

I''ve made some tests... eth2 is my internal interface, LAN is connected here. Before I had IMQ device in AB mode... PREROUTING [A]fter NAT, POSTROUTING [B]efore NAT. I want the same situation on ifb. I do this in this way: --- # incoming traffic here from LAN is before NAT tc qdisc add dev eth2 handle ffff: ingress # outcoming traffic here from WAN is after NAT tc qdisc add dev eth2

Let''s move this to the Shorewall Development list.... On Tuesday 10 February 2004 03:14 pm, xavier wrote: > here is a patch to allow this : > |ACCEPT<10/sec:20>:debug fw lan:$ntp_servers udp 123 - - - - ntp > > a problem with the patch is that now the logprefix is mandatory. > i''m trying to debug it, but i can''t find the flaw. Also, with

Hi. I was asked to put a real IP behind a linux router is doing static NAT for an internal network. Internet (gateway) | | | eth0 = real IP ----------------- L I N U X ROUTER ----------------- eth1 = private IP | | | eth0 = real IP ----------------- Wireless Access Point -----------------

The LARTC howto correctly describes load balancing and split access for traffic from a machine with multiple ISP connections (http://www.lartc.org/lartc.html#LARTC.RPDB.MULTIPLE-LINKS) -- *provided* the traffic originates from the machine itself (i.e. traffic regularly handled by the INPUT and OUTPUT chains of iptables). When forwarding traffic from an attached local network, the following

Hi, I configured a router box to use 2 providers, as described in the HOWTO. (Apendix 1) I want to use both links to reach a single smtp server. As I read in the kptd and in some old messages of this list, doing a SNAT in the postrouting chain comes _after_ the routing desision. So I guess the following lines I''m trying to use are wrong. (See Apendix 1) What can I do to have multiple

Hi Here is a short description of my network: ppp0 (adsl) ppp1 (adsl) | | | | --------------------- | Router | | Firewall | | MASQUERAD | | DNAT | | | | eth0 | --------------------- | | | ---------------------- |

We have found a critical problem with the XEN 3.1 release (for those who are running 15-20 VMs on a single server). We are using the official XEN 3.1 release on a rackable server (Dual-Core AMD Opteron, 8GB RAM). The problem we are seeing is that intermittently vifs fail to work properly in VMs after we create around 15-17 VMs on our server (all running at the same time, created one by

Hi, I have three linux machines, and I want to let one of them forward packets betwen the other two. The forwarding node has two ethernet cards, connecting the two two machines respectively. However, when I ping between the two end points, the forwarding node can receive the ping requests at its eth0, but it never forwards them to its eth1. So is the reverse direction. The forwarding node is

Hi, I have a big "name problem" with my internal mail server (10.0.0.152). It is "seen" on the internet through DNAT (213.58.230.27). Also there is a MX record pointing to the machine. Everything works fine from the outside. However i can''t set the mail clients on the lan pointing to the mx record, because this one points to 213.58.230.27 and the firewall

Hello, there''s a problem I''ve had for several months now, and I''ve never been able to find an answer to it. I''ll try to explain as quick as possible: I have a server that controlls my home network, it provides internet to them also (NAT) and I would like to provide QoS by shaping traffic. I have a p2p server here (running mldonkey), since only that

Hi, I''ve to restart shorewall when my dynamic IP was changed from my ISP. Of course i can with a shell script do it automatically, but the question is still there.. why ? mess-mate -- "I understand this is your first dead client," Sabian was saying. The absurdity of the statement made me want to laugh but they don''t call me Deadpan

Hi, I need some special masq rules to allow internal servers to resolve public IP''s which are loadbalanced by LVS - the rule are: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -m ipvs --vaddr <LVS PUBLIC IP>/32 --vport 80 -j SNAT --to-source <LVS INTERNAL IP> Also I need to enable: echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/vs/conntrack Currently I do all this from /etc/shorewall/started - but is

I''m trying to use my VPS server (single interface of course) as somewhat of a VPN gateway to my other location (which is not accessible directly from some places) where the openvpn server is running, and am kind of lost as to what to try next. I tried a redirect rule, but apparently shorewall didn''t like that (it just failed to start). I tried adding the rules via

Hello All Currently on a CentOS 4.3 system with the 2.6.14.3 kernel. Is there a recommend way to properly recompile the kernel? I was thinking of dling the source from kernel.org, but I was told that using SRPMs would be better? Any suggestions ? Thank You -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi, I thought sending email went out on port 25? When I look with ethereal, outbound email transfers were on port 58020. I assume it''s choosing a random port for transfer? If so how do I tag it with iptables mark? I was hoping it was as simple as tagging port 25. Thanks, Mark