similar to: Fedora Core 3 / 2.6.9-1.667

Hello, I''m stuck IPSECing my wireless network at home and would appreciate any comments. I appologize in advance if I''m wasting your time with trivia - I''m not a professional and staring at the problem for days from various angles hasn''t done me any good ... My home server/firewall (morannon) is hooked up through an USB to ethernet adapter (eth1) to my DSL

Having study a number of documents on linux traffic shaper, I started to setup my shaping rules in my network. My linux box is running RH AS3 U3, shorewall 2.0.9. It is using PPPoE connected to the Internet firewall: eth0: connect to the adsl modem eth1: private net ppp0: virtual dial up interface for pppoe There is a ftp server on the private net It is listen for port 21 and configured

The patches may be found at: http://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/contrib/IPSEC ftp://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/contrib/IPSEC I found these patches on the netfilter-devel list and make no warranties as to how well they work (or not). -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net PGP

Hi, it seems not to be possible to add more than one host at once to a zone. So shorewall add br0:eth0:192.168.2.10,eth0:192.168.2.11 work fails, since "br0:eth0:192.168.2.10,eth0" is interpreted as one interface. --snip -- iptables v1.2.9: interface name `eth0:192.168.2.10,eth0'' must be shorter than IFNAMSIZ (15) Try `iptables -h'' or ''iptables

Hi, I''ve set up a bridge which connects two parts of the same subnet with each other. I''ve set up everything as described in the Documentation and it works very nicely. However: I have a problem with adding hosts to zones dynamically. The zone I want to add hosts to is called ''work''. Since only the bridge br0 is defined in /etc/shorewall/interfaces

http://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/2.2-Beta/shorewall-2.2.0-Beta2 ftp://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/2.2-Beta/shorewall-2.2.0-Beta2 Problems Corrected: 1. The "shorewall check" command results in the (harmless) error message: /usr/share/shorewall/firewall: line 2753: check_dupliate_zones: command not found 2. The

This one is really throwing me. Thanks in advance for any advice. I''m working on a 4 port firewall system. It is running heartbeat+drbd. Primary box looks like this: eth0 -> net/cicso router 192.168.144.2/29 eth1 -> drbd/heartbeat crossover cable 192.168.254.253/30 eth2 -> dmz 192.168.144.10/24 eth3 -> loc 192.168.101.2/24 The IP''s

Hi, I have a few problems with my shorewall configuration. First of all, the option maclist seems no to be recognized. I have this: ghostwheel /etc/shorewall # cat interfaces | grep -v ''^#'' - eth1 detect dhcp,tcpflags,routefilter loc eth0 detect tcpflags,maclist When I look at shorewall-init.log, I found out:

I am using debian sarge. I want to block all incoming requests except DNS (port 53) and allow all outgoing traffic. I did a apt-get shorewall. When I start shorewall, I cannot even ping to any external site. I am a newbie and difficult to follow the online guide. Can anyone please help me. Thanks !

What version of shorewall do you suggest I try on a FC3 system? TIA, /ChJ

Hello all -- I am trying to get Shorewall, ipsec and RedHat ES version 3 to cooperate. Before posting any specific problems, I thought I''d find out if I have the right stuff to work with. (I''ve gotten ipsec to work flawlessly with Shorewall using RH 8 and 9 kernels, so I have some experience with it. Shorewall 2.0.12 works fine on this ES 3 box, except for the ipsec part)

I have had to replace an existing setup which has a bunch of IPs Proxy-NAT''ed onto the loc segment. While I do eventually want to move them to their own segment, I have to deal with this for the next few weeks. My problem is that from a loc system I can ping the public IP of a system being proxy-ARP''d but I can''t hit it via HTTP. Nothing is being blocked according

[newbie question] Before using Shorewall I used to manually write some very short iptables rules which where probably much poorer than what this Shorewall gem does but I could "follow" them very easily. Now reading the output of iptable -L gives me a terrible headache. Is there some tool that graphs the rules in order to "see" them better ? For instance I was experiencing

While I have concentrated on support for 2.6 native IPSEC in release 2.2.0, I am still of the opinion that unless you absolutely need IPSEC compatibility that OpenVPN is a much easier (and in the case of roadwarriors, a much better) solution. Having already generated all of the required X.509 certificates, it took me less than 1/2 hr to replace my IPSEC testbed with an OpenVPN one using the new

I''m having a problem where transferring files accross our IPsec gateway to another host on a remote network is failing. I see no packets being rejected in the logs. Attached is a packet trace, showing the problem. In this case, 10.100.0.0/24 is the local network and 10.100.14.0/24 is the remote network. The trace was taken on the local gateway. In the trace, there is a set of TCP

I am running a Redhat FC2 server, which runs postfix for mail, Squid for proxy and samba as Domain Controller and file server. I installed shorewall-2.1.11-1. In the shorewall rules /etc/shorewall/rules I added the following for samba ACCEPT LAN $FW:192.168.100.1 tcp 139,445 ACCEPT LAN $FW:192.168.100.1 udp 137:139 ACCEPT LAN $FW:192.168.100.1 udp 445

http://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/2.2-Beta/shorewall-2.2.0-RC1 ftp://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/2.2-Beta/shorewall-2.2.0-RC1 Problems Corrected: 1. The syntax of the add and delete command has been clarified in the help summary produced by /sbin/shorewall. New Features: 1. TCP OpenVPN tunnels are now supported using the ''openvpn'' tunnel type. OpenVPN

Hello, This is not really a shorewall problem. But just wanted to check if this problem rang a bell with any of you. I have a linux router with slackware 9.1, and kernel 2.4.27 Everyting works ok except for access to web sites that use akamai from behind the router. >From the router machine itself I can access those sites without problems. But machines behind nat, take forever to access

Having moved from a "cascading LANs" configuration to two independent LANs on eth0 and eth1, I still get some "state INVALID" for which I am not sure what the cause is. Can somebody help me understand its probable origin? Thanks, Costantino [see attachment]

Tom, I am NOT subscribed (yet). I dropped SuSeFirewall2 in favor of shorewall to get past the configuration hurdles I as experiencing. At the moment, when my SuSe 9.1 starts up, I can see shorewall processing the rules, policies, etc. and I see no errors and then moves on with the rest of the SuSe boot process . However, no traffic passes through using the rules. I run an iptables -L and I