similar to: NAT with ip rule and ip route

Hi, I been trying on ip rule fwmark and iptables MARK. I will show my testing in detail, but my ultimate question is why ONLY marking in Mangle OUTPUT tables works, but not others? Network Diagram ------------ 192.168.250.197 eth0 LINUX ROUTER eth1 192.168.8.88 ------------------ 192.168.8.112 eth0 Windows XP Client Steps (performed on LINUX ROUTER) (1) Delete route to 192.168.8.0 from

Hi, Here I am trying something simple. My objective is to make ip rule fwmark command work :) Network Diagram: --- 192.168.250.197 (eth0) Linux Box (eth1) 192.168.8.88 -------------192.168.8.122 (eth0) Windows XP Client Configuration done on Linux Box:- (1) [root@g webauth]# iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -j MARK --set-mark 5 [root@g webauth]# iptables -t mangle -L Chain PREROUTING (policy

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

-----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:

Hi, I'm trying to setup a SIP trunk between 2 Asterisk servers on the same LAN (no NAT, no firewalls). With IAX2 all's fine but I'm unable to setup SIP. I must be missing something obvious. I followed the simple example at http://www.panoramisk.com/90/sip-trunk-with-asterisk/en/. so Asterisk server 1 (192.168.250.111) sip.conf contains: [interboxsip] type=peer host=192.168.250.112

Hello newsgroup, I hope somebody with more routing experience then me can help me with the problem I have. The setup is as described below. A dual internet provider routing, multiple local area networks, and a dmz network with one public and one private ip range. I followed the instructions at lartc.org, and so far everything is working. The default route is via

hi I have trying to remove the extra rules from my routing tables, however with no luck Also I want to know these duplicate entries have an effect on packets going routed? I have this overwhelming rules lists from my predessor who added the "ip rule add fwmark" entries in firewall script, and on each run of firewall script its creates an extra entry in routing table. Now what I want to

Hello all, When I try to compile the mod_webauth module on CentOS 5, the dependencies for Kerberos fail. I have the Kerberos libs installed, which is what I assume it's complaining about. Ideas? Is there an RPM missing? Here's some of what I found: [root at localhost webauth-3.5.4]# ./configure checking for gcc... gcc checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out

Hello, LARTC mailing readers, I hope u can help with this mysterious issue i''m having with my linux box acting as a router. Scenario: Linux running 2.6.8.1 /w julians patches Latest iproute (iproute2-ss040702) 4 NICS ----------------- | x eth0 (63.43.x.x) network mask (255.255.240.0) | | x eth1 (63.43.x.x)

Hello, LARTC mailing readers, I hope u can help with this mysterious issue i''m having with my linux box acting as a router. Scenario: Linux running 2.6.8.1 /w julians patches /w support for multipath routing Latest iproute (iproute2-ss040702) 4 NICS ----------------- | x eth0 (63.43.x.x) network mask (255.255.240.0) | |

Hi... I have installed ip route 2 package on Linux kernel 2.4.25 I am using 2 tables: ################################### ebox:100.254~# ip route list table ALTER default via 192.168.100.253 dev br0 ebox:100.254~# ip route list table main 10.0.0.254 dev ppp0 proto kernel scope link src 10.0.0.1 192.168.100.0/24 dev br0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.100.254 192.168.100.0/24 dev

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

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

Hello list. I may become crazy without your help. I''m not nubie, but... All worked with 2.4 kernel, but when I have to move to 2.6.8.1 it''s not. I''m using "ip route nat 231.222.222.111 via 172.16.1.13" to substitute inet address 231.222.222.111 on 172.16.1.13 during routing. Look at the output: _____________ myhost log # ip route list table local broadcast

Sorry for disturbung you, but I am not aware about a specialized forum/ml for iproute2. I try to use iproute2''s dumb nat, I tried with kernels 2.4.27, .32 and 2.6.8. While DNAT is working fine, I am not able to do any SNAT: 2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 link/ether 00:04:e2:10:88:5f brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 10.10.20.10/24 brd

Has anyone set up any form of apache user isolation on CentOS? I have multiple virtual hosts on my machine, run by users who do not trust eachother. The problem is that any php script run by apache is able to do things like raw file io on other users' .htpasswds, php scripts, hidden directory listings, and so on. Database passwords can even be divulged in this way, since they are often stored

Witam wszystkich After few days with yours help I''ve succeeded with setup of load-balancing. Now I have problem with next step. I want to mark some packets and than put them to the one of the routing tables to force them going via only one interface with only one ip. Easy?? Ofcourse, but not for me :(. I''m NOT using NAT. Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 71 packets, 24227

Hi, All Sorry for English But I need new ideas for my problem I have a local network, server with 2 Internet channels Local computers connect to server via VPN. Task: some users go to Internet through first Internet channel other through second. System Suse 9.2, kernel 2.6.8. I read iproute documentaion and configured routes. Ping from server go through 2 channels. ping -I eth_inet1 www.ya.ru -

Hi, Reward offered: 50$ (paypal), and I am sure this is a ridiculous thing I have missing. My goal: On a 2 NIC Asterisk box, to send packets that came in Asterisk on NIC1 back to NIC 1, and NIC2 back to NIC 2. (basically, send them back the same way they came from). I have been doing what was recommended to me and mangling packets left and right. I have reached a point where I am

sorry, you r right i just checked it with registration so there were astdb entries for SIP registration. anyhow after clearing settings frm astdb i tried the same scenario you advised but no luck. I think i told that i am not using server as peer but want to use a user [abc] as peer so that when ever i use dial(SIP/${EXTEN}@abc) or dial(SIP/abc/${EXTEN}) the call will be out from server using