similar to: Some DNAT''s work, some don''t

Hi, I have multiple ppp interfaces that does not correspond to the same network usage. Do you know anything about trying to set definitively the ppp+ name ? or anything to adapt automagically iptables to the real network which is behind each ppp+ interface ? I''ve tooken a look into the IFNAME env var... but it doesn''t seems to work :c/ regards, -- BeTa

I see support in shorewall for the KAME-tools, how about strongswan ? I have setup shorewall 3.4.4 and strongswan 4.1.3, making this my vpn-gateway for the subnet behind it. # Shorewall version 3.4 - Zones File #ZONE TYPE OPTIONS IN OUT # OPTIONS OPTIONS fw firewall fil ipsec mode=tunnel mss=1400 net ipv4

breakdown of what iam doing ok i have access to 6 ips and i want to run all of them through my firewall ifconfig eth0 209.159.32.162 netmask 255.255.255.0 up ifconfig eth0:1 209.159.32.163 netmask 255.255.255.0 up that sets up the network card to have 2 address well in shorewall i tried to add eth0:1 to my interfaces well it says that Determining Zones... Zones: inet inet2 loc cust vpn1

I have a firewall running Shorewall 1.3.13-1 from rpm on a redhat 7.3 box. The box has three nics assigned to zones loc net and dmz. We also have multiple vpn links accomplished via ssh tunnels, These links all come from dynamic IP addresses with known private subnets behind them. There are basically two types of networks these vpns connect, one with access to almost everything and one with

Hi, Tinc experts Diagram as below, A is trying to access host X behind C: A >> B >> C — “host X" B is the tinc server for A, but also B is the tinc client to connect to C. My question is, if I only use one VPN (/etc/tinc/myvpn), then the host configuration for B will be tricky. As the tinc server to A, B’s host config (/etc/tinc/myvpn/hosts/B) needs have the Subnet = X/32,

Hí everybody, you have a nice day. I am configuring accounting in shorewall /etc/shorewall/accounting and the traffic between eth0 (local network)1, eth2(local network2) and eth3(local network3) <--> eth1(ip public network), works fine. I make the accounting because y want to control the remote vpn access(pptpd) throught shorewall. Which is the way to control vpn /ip/access in

Hi! I don;t know what i am doing wrong because i have still Low ID on aMule. I have action.AllowaMule and accept tcp 4662:4771 and udp 4672. Thanks, Mitja

Hello Mailinglist, please excuse my bad english - but I am not a native speaker. My Network looks like this: Internet --- dyn. IP --- Firewall (shorewall) --- LAN (192.168.X.X) No I try to connect my iphone (from mobile Internet G3) over VPN (l2tp/ipsec) with the firewall. But I can´t open the necessary Port 1701. /var/log/syslog ... Dec 30 00:24:29 router kernel: [226128.293757]

Hi, Etienne In addition, is there any option or switch can turn of the automatic direct connection? For the example below, even A has the route to C and can establish UDP connection directly, but I need the traffic to go through B, how can I achieve that easily? (instead of remove something from A’s routing table, or manually block the connection between A and C) > On 1 May 2017, at 6:28 PM,

There is no concept of "client" or "server" in tinc. tinc is purely peer-to-peer. "ConnectTo" statements only indicate which node will attempt to establish the initial connection, but once the connection is established, direction does not matter. It is unclear from your message which node is responsible for which subnet. If X/32 truly belongs to C, then simply set

Dear All I have added the following line to /etc/shorewall/rules: ACCEPT net fw tcp 4662 However, the program aMule continues to give me the following error: NG : Your 4662 port is not reachable. Any further ideas? Thanks in advance, Paul

Hi, Etienne I took a look for the below host configuration parameter (IndirectData), the default is no. For the below example: A ConnectTo B, B ConnectTo C: If IndirectData = no (default), then A wouldn’t establish direct connection with C, but will be forwarded by B. If IndirectData = yes, then A will try to establish direct connection with C, even though A don’t have the statement of

Greetings, me again. I''m starting to feel miff now. If I have a few vpn tunnels with different tun interfaces. And all this tunnel traffic is coming in on my eth0 interface, it also leave via eth0 again. I would like to share the available bandwidth evenly with tunnel clients. Would applying the bandwidth rule on eth0 with htb & sfq work for sharing the bandwidth or will

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

Hello list, I wish to report a problem with openvpn tunnels. Synopsis: Despite adding policies to the shorewall policy file, I have to add extra rules to allow the UDP port 5000 packets to get through. I have used no particular setup guide. I believe this problem goes away with shorewall 2.0.9, as I have implemented openvpn with that version on a different machine, and I see no UDP:5000 packet

You’re talking about Layer 2 bridging by Tinc? The use case here is layer 3 routing, but anyway, thanks for your feedback. > On 1 May 2017, at 8:09 PM, LowEel <loweel at gmx.de> wrote: > > I cannot understand why you say the configuration for B will be tricky. > > If you select the switch mode, and some machine can initiate a > connection to some other machine, until

Hi peploe, i am new in the list, i need know, how blocked the Amule/emule in shorewall? My dist. debian version: 3.2.6-shorewall -- .~. / v \ Seja Livre, use GNU/Linux! /( )\ ^^-^^ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.

Anybody knows some graphic reporting/analysing program for shorewall 4.0.7 or i have to do it by accounting? -- Javier Martínez Technical Manager ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/

I am trying to setup openVPN 2.0 beta11 (sever/client configuration) and shorewall. I managed to get it working with out shorewall in the mix. When I start shorewall this message appears in the logs. Oct 12 13:41:03 localhost kernel: Shorewall:net2all:DROP:IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:04:5a:7f:92:9f:00:b0:c2:89:68:e4:08:00 SRC=69.145.71.133 DST=216.187.138.18 LEN=42 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=46 ID=11 DF

Hello all, I am a newbie to Linux firewalls, and am trying to setup shorewall to allow connections from an Oracle client to an Oracle Server. The client tries to connect to the server via port 1521 (it works fine) and once the first connection has been successful, the server sends a redirect to the client to a random high port. So, when the client tries to connect again to the sevrer on that port