similar to: Shorewall 1.3.14

Beta 1 is now available at: http://www.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta ftp://ftp.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta Features include: 1) An OLD_PING_HANDLING option has been added to shorewall.conf. When set to Yes, Shorewall ping handling is as it has always been (see http://www.shorewall.net/ping.html). When OLD_PING_HANDLING=No, icmp echo (ping) is handled via rules and

When an interface name appears in the second column of an entry in /etc/shorewall/masq, Shorewall will detect all hosts and subnets routed through that interface and will masquerade traffic from those hosts and subnets. This is slightly more general than what I posted recently on the users list since it uses the routing table rather than the IP configuration of the interface. Example:

The second Beta is now available at: http://www.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta ftp://ftp.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta Function from 1.3 that has been omitted from this version includes: 1) The ''check'' command is no longer supported. 2) The MERGE_HOSTS variable in shorewall.conf is no longer supported. Shorewall 1.4 behavior is the same as 1.3 with MERGE_HOSTS=Yes.

I am doing some testing of openwrt'd wireless access points, using madwifi-ng'd atheros radios. In the test configuration, I have three devices in a triangle, each has wds links to the other two devices. The ath0 interface is in ap mode, ath1 is a wds link to one device, and ath2 is a wds link to the other device. All three interfaces (and an ethernet interface) are in a bridge (br-lan)

The first 1.4.0 Beta is now available at: http://www.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta ftp://ftp.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta Function from 1.3 that has been omitted from this version includes: 1) The MERGE_HOSTS variable in shorewall.conf is no longer supported. Shorewall 1.4 behavior is the same as 1.3 with MERGE_HOSTS=Yes. 2. Interface names of the form

Here is the proposed content -- I''m looking for a Beta to start in the next week or so with release around the middle of next month. The main focus of 1.4 will be to provide external behavior similar to the upcoming 2.0 release. Function from 1.3 that has been omitted from this version includes: 1) The MERGE_HOSTS variable in shorewall.conf is no longer supported. Shorewall 1.4

Hi! Progress is much better now with my new install with not many problems left! I just have a simple - I hope - question. I have a few users that need access to the net via masquerade rules. The rest have to go via squid on the firewall. That all works well. I also have two windows servers that also need access to the net but they have to each use a specific outgoing ip address. I add two

I''ve opened up development of Shorewall 4.1. While I had previously announced that Shorewall 4.1 would focus on IPv6, I have since learned that the netfilter team are developing ''xtables'', a unified IP0v4/IPv6 utility. It seems silly to spend the effort to add Shorewall support for IPv6 only to then have to turn around and convert it to use xtables. So I''ve

http://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/2.2/shorewall-2.2.4 ftp://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/2.2/shorewall-2.2.4 Problems Corrected: 1. The error message: Error: No appropriate chain for zone <z1> to zone <z2> has been changed to one that is more self-explanatory: Error: No policy defined for zone <z1> to zone <z2> 2. When only an

Hi, I'm using linux 2.6.21.5 and our kernel is freeze. The problem is, if I create a Software bridge using $brctl command. and add two interfaces say, eth0.0 and eth0.1 using $brctl addbr br-lan $brctl addif br-lan eth0.0 $brctl addif br-lan eth0.1 and when i send traffic from a host connected to one port to host connected at other end, soon all the memory is dried up and and kernel

The first release candidate is now available at: http://www.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta ftp://ftp.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta The only change between Beta 1 and RC1 is that the ''check'' command is back in RC1. Function from 1.3 that has been omitted from this version includes: 1) The MERGE_HOSTS variable in shorewall.conf is no longer supported. Shorewall 1.4

My new DSL line came complete with a new Modem that is configured/monitored from a web browser. That inspired me to add a couple of new features to to the masq file which you can find in 2.1.1 (see attached release notes, New Feature 2). The modem has IP address 192.168.1.1 and is connected to eth0. My local network is 192.168.1.0/24 and is connected to eth2 which has IP address

Hello all: I''ve got a confusing issue. I had a working shorewall configuration (based on the two interface model) using DNAT for redirection to my HTTP server. The HTTP server is on my inside network (I know - bad juju, but one thing at a time). I changed my configuration this morning to use views in my BIND (named) configuration. Everyone outside the firewall is able to get in

Hi! I just recently entered the wonderful world of the so called "advanced routing" and decided to try and limit the bandwidth of a MASQed network here and ended up in trouble :(. The setup is (as far as I can tell) pretty straightforward. eth0 is connected to the "real" network with a proper IP, and eth2 is 192.168.10.x (the MASQed network). All of it is basicly right out of

Hi list, I use Samba 3.0.24 on Etch. I want to connect to my Samba share trough routed vpn. Samba server works well from the lan, and my openvpn works fine. But something is strange ... In my smb.conf : hosts allow = 127.0.0.1 192.168.10.0/24 10.8.0.0/24 hosts deny = 0.0.0.0/0 bind interfaces only = yes interfaces = 127.0.0.1 192.168.10.254 10.8.0.1 where 192.168.10.254 is my lan

--On Friday, January 24, 2003 1:59 PM -0700 Steve Fink <stevef@netvantix.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2003-01-24 at 08:31, Tom Eastep wrote: >> >> >> --On Friday, January 24, 2003 8:20 AM -0700 Steve Fink >>> <stevef@netvantix.com> wrote: >>> >>> http://leaf.netvantix.com/012303/swstatus.txt >>> >> >> It looks like your

I have a three interface network (net,loc,dmz). The internet interface (eth0) has a static IP. Windows machine in the local network (eth1) use DHCP to get IPs from the 192.168.10.0/24 netblock. The Debian machine in the DMZ (eth2) gets a fixed IP through DHCP in the 192.168.11.0/24 netblock. The DHCP server is running on the firewall machine (not ideal, I know, but that''s the way

Hi, I have the following newbie question, it is possible have two (or more) domains in the same IP subnetwork (e.g. 192.168.10.0/24)? I understand that is not possible have two PDC for the same domain in the same subnetwork, but I'm not sure what happens if we have two domains. Thanks for your help. Regards, -- Mauricio Strello C.

Hello, everyone, I'm new to this mailing list. So please excuse me if this topic has been discussed before. We have a network that consists of a few subnetworks. Each subnetwork has its own network address. In each subnet there are Windows 95/98/NT machines, as well as Linux/Unix machines that run Samba. NO NT Domain is used! I've configured cross-subnetwork browsing by 1. using

On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Jonah Naylor wrote: > I'm still getting "Connection refused on the client cgi screen as well > as in the shell it gives me UPS upsname at ipaddresshere is unavailable... You reported that access works correctly from elsewhere on the master subnetwork. Does access from the master subnetwork produce the "accepts" e-mail message generated by the