similar to: Proxy ARP and RH 7.2

Hopefully this is an easy question.... I''m using a leaf router (bearing) running shorewall. Three interfaces net, loc, and dmz. Only one computer in the dmz and its being proxy arp''d. External and internal (net and loc) can reach the dmz but the dmz cannot reach the isp''s gateway and beyond, but can reach a system adjacent to the firewall.

Hi all! I posted earlier about the proxy arp configuration = http://shorewall.sourceforge.net/shorewall_setup_guide.htm#NonRouted, = and was probably not sufficiently knowledgeable on the subject. I''ve = gone through a bunch of documents on proxy arp, subnetting with proxy = arp and the documentation at shorewall, and have come up with a setup = that would be perfect for the job at hand

Hello everybody. I could not find an answer to my problem in the archive. (But that may just be me :-) ) I have a problem with proxy arp and connection from loc (localnet) and from the firewall. Works fine from internet to dmz / proxy arp and vise versa. I have a feeling the solution is simple, but I''m no guru in Linux routing etc. The problem seems to be the routing setup. loc -

Hi everybody. I''m trying to configure shorewall folowing this manual: http://www.montanalinux.org/proxmox-ve-with-shorewall.html But with shorewall check it tells me thah: Checking /etc/shorewall/interfaces... ERROR: Unknown zone (dmz) : /etc/shorewall/interfaces (line 16) How can I define it in the zone file? thanks for the help. best regards, Santiago.

http://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Alpha/shorewall-2.0.0 ftp://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Alpha/shorewall-2.0.0 -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net

Okay, so I''m trying to setup my multiple ISP setup that I described earlier. I have: # ip addr 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo inet6 ::1/128 scope host valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 2: em1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP>

The Shorewall support page advocates including the output of "shorewall status" with problem reports that involve some sort of connection problem. I suspect that the number of people who feel comfortable analyzing problems through use this output is small. To help, I''ve created http://shorewall.net/AnalyzingShorewallStatus.html I suspect that the document isn''t

>From: "Shawn Wright" <swright@sls.bc.ca> >Subject: [Shorewall-users] Finally making some progress >I *think* we are finally making some progress in tracking our elusive >performance problems. After employing a second 10Mb link from our ISP, >along with another firewall box and proxy, we were able to determine the >problem *is* our firewall. We don''t

Hi All, For my issue, first thanks to ALL, I have some idea of it. Also Thank Peter for his kind remind, I would become one good guy in this list. Most mentioned MTU, but how I assure that the problem is just MTU, how I debug it? Here is my bridge configuration: Internet | | Gateway | | eth0 Ethernet Bridge | eth1 | H u b ( one normal hub

In an effert move my Dmz from a snapqear roouter to Linux with shorewall. Question is I have network 64.42.53.200/29 which makes default gw 64.42.53.201 network 64.42.53.200 broadcast 64.42.53.207 mask 255.255.255.248 and I want to set up shorewall with eth0 64.42.53.202 eth1 local eth2 dmz where dmz will use say 64.42.53.203 for web and email server. Where I do not need or should I say use

Hi all! I''ve set up a Linux box with shorewall doing proxy arp as per http://www.shorewall.net/shorewall_setup_guide.htm#ProxyARP the 5.2 (non routed) example. Everything is working great except for one thing, and that leads me to my question: is there a conflict between proxy arp and pptp? I''ve set the apropriate ACCEPT rules to allow tcp port 1723 and protocol 47 to the host

I have an access-IProm my isp that I configured my eth0 with. And I also have an IP-range assigned from my ISP that will be used on my servers connected to eth1. The IP-range is routed thru the access-IP. This is how my configfiles look like. Internal everything seems to work but not external. /etc/shorewall/proxyarp #ADDRESS INTERFACE EXTERNAL HAVEROUTE

OK one factor that I had not mentioned previously is this is my first time running Debian (yes I managed to do that since 1997...). Yesterday I found /etc/network/interfaces and understood what it does! My system is like the "About My Network" example except that I have 2 class Cs in the DMZ. >From what I understand I use the same IP on the NET and DMZ interfaces. I don''t

In a previous thread, Tom listed advantages (reproduced below) of Proxy ARP over NAT. They are great reasons, but I have one reservation. By using private addresses with NAT for servers in my DMZ, I can granularly allow specific traffic, such as to/from the SMTP gateway/relay in the DMZ, to connect inbound from the DMZ to an internal (LOC) mail server, and know that it comes only from a

This will be the last Shorewall release for a while as I''m going to be focusing on Documentation. In this release: 1. Empty and invalid source and destination qualifiers are now detected in the rules file. It is a good idea to use the ''shorewall check'' command before you issue a ''shorewall restart'' command be be sure that you don''t

Hi Alex, and thanks for your time. Probably not. The servers are only configured like they where when they where parallel to the fw. Just the default gateway, same as for the external interface on the fw. That''s what the documentation instructed to configure the servers using arp. But is it required with extra configuration on the server connected via proxy arp? Or is it some parameter

I''ve got a serious mess of NAT on our firewall/router systems at the corporate office which seems to do nothing other than confuse the heck out of people. What I''d like to do is gradually migrate the hosts on the various DMZ networks away from private IP addresses and NAT over to public IP addresses and proxyarp. What I''m wondering, before I start this, is how do I

I noticed the long standing Ipsec FSwan problem was fixed. But do you still have to make sure Ipec is not running when shorewall starts Reason I ask Is I could not get my Dmz working with Ipsec in the equation. Thanks Mike

I figured I should post this because before I went to do it I searched the web for caveats etc and didn''t really find much. So anyway, I set up bonding + vlan for a project. Computer is dell powerdge 350 with 2 intel 82559 10/100 nic running stock 2.4.20. I tried both the eepro100 and the e100 drivers for the nics, both work 802.1q and bonding are modules. Switch is cisco 2924xl-en

Hello list I''m considering moving shorewall to a xen domu and the using the Proxy ARP method (we use NAT today). Is it possible to have a Proxy ARP firewall inside a domu serving requests to other domus with public IP-addresses placed on separate hardware (not the hardware the domu with the firewall is on) ? I figure that there''s a problem since it''s different bridges