similar to: Tinc + OSPF - is it feasible?

Hi, The network topo looks like this: the original network: router1 router2 | | |----------------OSPF------------| the target network: (we need to insert a transparent firewall between these 2 routers, so a proxy arp is set up on firewall to bridge router1 and router2) router1 firewall router2 |

Hi Everyone, I have a routing situation where Tinc looks like it could come in extremely useful, but I have a query I hope someone can cast an eye on, as I'm unsure whether Tinc can help me here. I currently have a Quagga OSPF linux router which connects LAN A to LAN B over the quickest available of two routes (both routes at both ends connect to Quagga boxes to prevent collisions). One of

Hi List, FYI. We have been using CentOS 6.4 and have 2 vpn/gre tunnels to separate cisco rtrs using ospf. with kernel 2.6.32-358.23.2 We have upgraded to 6.5 bit using kernel 2.6.32-431.5.1 and the exact same configuration scripts for our vpn/gre tunnels. What I see is the first gre tunnel works great and I get an ospf neighbor. The second tunnel comes up and I can ping across it and I see

What shorewall rules would be required to allow the OSPF routing protocol to pass fw<->loc? Any suggestions would be appreciated. Ben

I have a fairly simply laid out network that could easily use static routing. However, I plan to expand quickly and don''t wish to spend the better part of my life maintaining static routes. INTERNET | --------- Gateway | - LAN 172.16.1.x | - LINK 192.168.1.1 --------- |<----wifi --------- router 2 | -LAN 172.16.2.x | -Link 192.168.1.2 ---------

Hello, I've recently saw a discussion on this list, about a standardised way of emptying POP3 mailboxes on the server - but no solution came up. Please provide a suggestion for the following situation: - I am running a stock POP3 dovecot server, on Fedora 12 (dovecot version 1.2.9) - passwd-file authentication via /etc/imap.passwd - users are virtual, sharing the same UID/GID; -

Hi all, I am currently trying to emulate a satellite link, via Netem, on a testbed which is OSPF-enabled. I''d like to set up a Netem box between two routers. Since all routing between routers is dynamic, I''m wondering how to set up OSPF on my Netem box? Could someone indicate me if it is feasible and give me some guidelines to possibly do so? Thanks in advance, Vincent.

Hello all, Thank you for tinc, that is an **excellent** and useful package! Taking into account that both Red Hat and Debian (8.x) families now use systemd, there is, IMHO, one small. but important correction to be done: tinc's initialization. IMHO, we need: 1. A proper tinc.service file, included by default (prepackaged) in the stock .deb and .rpm packages in Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu,

Hello, Is this the proper place to suggest an enhancement for the stock dovecot package ? The enhancement would be the following: For the time being, the dovecotpw utility offers a standardised way to interactively encode a user password in a certain scheme, say: dovecotpw -s CRYPT Enter new passord: Re-enter new password: etc. Given a *valid* /etc/imap.passwd file (passwd-file

Pe 7 Aug 2013 11:35, Timo Sirainen a scris: >> Thank you, but doveadm expunge will ask for the mailbox name: >> >> [root at mail1 ~]# doveadm expunge -u john.doe at example.com ON >> 2013-08-07 doveadm(root): Fatal: expunge: To avoid accidents, >> search query must contain MAILBOX in all search branches > > Add: mailbox '*' Thank you, it works! May I

I am setting up 2 Vyatta routers that will serve as redundant failover core routers out to the backbone of our ISP. They will be serving for routing between other branches and the ISP and bandwidth management. I am trying to differentiate between the plethora of information about having redundant, automatic failover routers and pretty much decided on VRRP for the IP address failover mechanism. I

Hello, Would you please help me solve the following case? My (CentOS) server runs dovecot and allows both POP3 and IMAP service. Users are virtual users (no home directories), with messages stored in Maildir directories under /var/spool/mail/vhosts/example.com/username Some of them use mobile devices (without local storage space), so I must allow IMAP access, not just POP3. But the storage

Hi, all! Can I enable multicasting via shorewall? I have router with Gentoo Linux (one interface to ISP, one with alises - to local network). Shorewall work perfect! But now I need setup Quagga (zebra) for dynamic routing between one more router via another provider. All routers daemons (zebra, ripd, ospf) used multicasting. In my configuration already enabled allowBcast and etc.

Well, this is a major pain in the ass. I got realtime static working for sip.conf. 'Great!' I thought. That was until I realised I couldn't use it. Our Asterisk systems are using OSPF and listen on interface lo:1. Asterisk doesn't like to use an interface name for it's bindaddr setting, so you have to put the IP address of lo:1 in there. If you put in 0.0.0.0, it seems to

Hello again, >From the point of view of a Red Hat *user*, the standardised way of doing things would be to have an /etc/sysconfig/tinc file containing something like: NETWORKS="vpn1 vpn2 vpn3" (one or more names separated by spaces) At initialization, each name should launch a separate tinc instance (a different VPN) tinc service should not start until the user adds at least

La 25.09.2015 13:00, tinc-request at tinc-vpn.org a scris: > Unfortunately, this is not something that maps well to systemd. It would > require a systemd to run a script that parses the sysconfig file and > start all the tinc daemons. Systemd will then put all those daemons in > the same control group and won't recognize something is wrong if only > one of the daemons fail. So

Hello, Since the present tinc documentation is not very clear about this, please explain the following: is it mandatory to include the local IP address classes in the global VPN address class? Namely, please consider the following setup (which works great in practice): 1. A tinc VPN, full mesh, with n nodes (n > 3) 2. tinc runs on the firewall, which is also the default gateway for each

Before I start, I don''t want to do ECMP or simple bonding ... I have multiple Internet connections available to multiple boxes on one of my networks. Box A connects to ISPs 1, 2 and 3 Box B connects to ISPs 1 and 4 Boxes A and B are both connected to each other and the rest of the network. 1) I would like to set up some dynamic routing in such a way that any given outgoing packet from

Hi list, I have a problem I thought was simple first, but now I''m stuck. In a nutshell, it''s about redundant uplinks at an outside location. Crude ASCII-Art follows: Internet | | +------------+ | cisco with | | uplinks | +------------+ | | ATM interface +----------+ ... | alvarion | | | wireless

On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, David Summers wrote: > Thanks for the great software package! The question I have is this: Thank you :) > My goal is to set up a triangle topology VPN between three sites and run > OSPF routing on all the sites so that if a link goes down between any two > sites the OSPF routing will reroute the packets that used to go between > the sites A <-> B to A