similar to: ip route nat problem

Hello, I am trying something crazy here. I have gone through the old archives, lartc.org and lot''s of documentation, but still something is wrong. Here is the situation; The server is Fedora core 2 running kernel 2.6.5 I have 2 uplinks to two different ISP''s. (It will be 3-4 in the future). These ISP''s should serve the bandwith to local clients with multiple subnets.

Hi, I have been a shorewall user for a long time now, and it has been working flawlessly. I have now changed ISP and my new DSL connection is PPPoE. My setup is as follows: internet <--------> 3com812 Officeconnect (bridge mode) <----> eth0 <-------> linux box <----> eth1, eth2, eth3, eth4 <---> other internal networks Things are working fine, but the link is

Shorewall 4.5.1.1 I have 5 interfaces on a centos box, the first two are internal on two different subnets, the next two are two different ISP''s and the last one is a private network for testing and administration. The second internal subnet (eth1) is rejecting all the arp requests to it and I get the following in the log files ever second or two - May 16 05:28:54 services kernel:

Hi, I posted this question yesterday on the Openvpn mailing list, with no response, figured I will ask here too. I have been using openvpn for quite a while, no major problems encountered. Now I need to allow the server to access the lan of the client, and I can not figure out the routing. This is what I have after the tunnel is brought up: SERVER (A.A.A.A) Arx:~# ip addr ... 3: eth1:

I have a setup with two Internet providers. One circuit (net0 == eth1) is used primarily for employees and tunnels to other sites. The other (net1 == eth2) is for the production machines that customers access. Everythung works in teh sense that packets get to where they are sent (mostly) but I recently I had a sniffer on the system and noticed a problem I cannot solve. traffic coming in

I''m working with LEAF boxes as gateway machines. I''m trying to implement Proxy-ARP to build a bandwidth manager for my network. I''ve gone as per the lartc howto to implement a transparent bridge in an existing network and plan to put in my tc script after this. I''m configuring the box as a standalone one before plugging it into the network. I''m getting

Hello, I've been trying to implement a bridge in place for a clustered firewall at one of our office locations. Currently we NAT two class C's internally. We decided, for performance reasons, that it would make sense to put our servers into an official DMZ. So we started this bridging project. Our goal is to have two redundant firewalls in place. There is no need for active/active.

Hello, I am running Shorewall 2.0.2f, on SuSE 9.2 distro, kernel 2.6.8-24.11-default My ip addr show output is as follows: 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet 127.0.0.1/8 brd 127.255.255.255 scope host lo inet6 ::1/128 scope host valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 2: eth0:

Hi, I am creating some routing policy and I am having a basic problem with ip. I am starting with 2 hosts to test the configuration. ---------- ---------- | host A |------------| Host B | ---------- ---------- IP: 10.0.100.1 IP: 10.0.100.2 On hostA: # ip address add 10.0.100.1/24 dev eth0 brd + On hostB: # ip address add 10.0.100.2/24 dev eth0 brd +

Hi, I''m a relative newbie to LARTC but I have read Matthew Marsh''s book and lurked on this list for a while.... I still seem to be missing a few key ideas here.... So... Maybe folks on the list will be kind enough to help. I have two different ISPs. Cogent and Bell. I have three different firewalls (2 PIX and 1 IPCop). And I have an Ubuntu Linux box doing LARTC for around

Hi, after migrating to shorewall firewall from my own iptables rule set (to utilise freeswan vpn tunnels) I have successfully configured a 3 interface firewall with net2net vpn tunnels, with the help of the shorewall documentation. However I cannot seem to configure my final step which is to masq another subnet attached to my LAN (LANB, via Cisco 1603 router) to get internet access via the

Hello All, I'm installing some DIY routers, composed of Intel nuc's ,Linksys usb-ethernet adapters and Centos7 On most machines I just plug in the usb device, install Centos7 and everything works. But on this one machine the network interface doesn't work. After installing ip addr shows: [root at clgmol ~]# ip addr 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue

We switched over from a bordermanager firewall to a shorewall firewall. Some stuff is not working now. I realized that I had not created the route for the network that is not working however once I created it, it still didn''t work. Most of our network is fine however some pieces are not working. [Net] - [Shorewall] - [LAN] - [Cisco] - [Clients and servers not working] The firewall

Hello, We have 3 DSL connections connected to eth3 and another interface with a dedicated link in eth0 (main table) We want to balance selected traffic (using fwmark and iptables) through our 3 DSL connections in a secondary table named DSL (without using the dedicated link in eth0), but the next command is not accepted, and gives us the following error: # ip route add default

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello! I have a problem with a duplicate route entry, when using a pre-installed route and automatic take-over by the "heartbeat" daemon, which adds an address and the kernel adds an route automatically. Maybe anyone has an explanation... > ip addr 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo

Hello list, I want a set-up with a satellite link (eth0) and a cellular cdma link (ppp0) coming into a linux box with a LAN (eth1 or wlan0) to be able to route first through the satellite when it''s on, or else the cdma when it''s in range. Load sharing is not critical, but it would be nice. The satellite has a static IP, the cdma is dynamic. Both WANs are

Greetings routing folks, I want to use the netmask 255.255.255.255 to insulate (not quite isolate) machines on a shared subnet from each other. This works just fine on win XP, but Linux iproute will not acccept the gateway address in one step -- neither on the command line nor via DHCP: Here''s the interface, set up with a netmask of /32: # ip addr ... 2: eth0:

Dear All, Linux Kernel 2.4.20-8 Running Shorewall 2.2.0 ip addr show 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet 127.0.0.1/8 brd 127.255.255.255 scope host lo 2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 100 link/ether 00:48:54:53:82:45 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 62.68.254.178/28 brd

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

Hello All, I'm trying to figure out why xen-utils-common 3.2 doesn't suport bridging on multiple interfaces. I've been digging around /etc/xen/scripts/network-bridges. And modified it so that during boot, when executed the script writes into /tmp/netbr file, but I commented out code that actually creates bridges. I discovered that this script is called three times during boot, I