similar to: [Bridge] Error while trying to setup bridge, appears to be a loop

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

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 -

Having a problem with the 3 interface setup. I can get DMZ hosts, and FW to see internet, but anything on LOC interface is unable to get out. My first post to the list didn''t have the information needed, sorry for that, but thank you for pointing me to more resources. I''ve looked at the problem myself some more, but am still stuck. Shorewall Version: 2.2.1 ip addr show 1:

Lables: Gateway = 209.5.171.65 Netmask = 255.255.255.192 Eth0 = net = 209.5.171.66 Eth1 = loc = 192.168.0.1 There is no NAT clients, in essence loc is dmz. I can rename loc to dmz if that helps. Proxy/ARP is used for IP addresses 209.5.171.67-126 Problem: Using the Shorewall Action AllowFTP does not result in desired behavior when connecting from Internet to machines behind firewall in DMZ. From

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>

This is my system info: Debian Release: 10.5 APT prefers stable-updates APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 5.4.60-1-pve (SMP w/16 CPU cores) Kernel taint flags: TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE, TAINT_OOT_MODULE Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_US:en (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh

Here is my config: dubenda:~ # shorewall version 3.2.1 dubenda:~ # ip addr show 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue 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: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 link/ether

I have a dsl modem and two static IP addresses: 66.17.65.22 and 66.17.65.161. I am using the standard configuration from the Shorewall Setup Guide for multiple IP addresses and modifications suggested by the Aliased Interfaces Guide. I want to set up a shorewall 2.08 router for my home (Fedora Core 2 / kernel 2.6.8-1.521). I want share an internet connection with some pc''son a local

someone recommended that i should give br0 the same hardware address as eno2. I did that, and restarted the vm, and it still does not work. Here is my current host interface config: ip a 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default qlen 1000 link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo valid_lft

I'm pretty new to KVM and have a KVM CentOS 7.1 hypervisor running a few VMs. I'm moving all my VMs from an ESXi host as I want to use KVM in future. Most of my VMs are working except for one which is running a Sophos UTM router (Sophos UTM is similar to products like pfSense <https://www.pfsense.org/>, Smoothwall <http://www.smoothwall.org/> etc). The host has 3 physical NICs

Dear CentOS-Community, we are facing the following issue: A secondary ip address seems to be automatically added to a nic which causes several issues in our setup. This server is equipped with four nics which are currently in use: # nmcli con show NAME????? UUID????????????????????????????????? TYPE????? DEVICE eno2????? cb6fcb54-be52-4ab6-8324-88091a0ea1a0? ethernet? eno2 eno4?????

Hi, I''m a relative newbie to LARTC but I have read Matthew Marsh''s book and lurked on this list for a while.... I still seem to be missing a few key ideas here.... So... Maybe folks on the list will be kind enough to help. I have two different ISPs. Cogent and Bell. I have three different firewalls (2 PIX and 1 IPCop). And I have an Ubuntu Linux box doing LARTC for around

Hi, this is propably bridge related and not really a xen problem, but it might help someone: Some of our domUs are not able to arp. Arp -n show (incomplete), and doing a tcpdump shows, that on the dom0''s eth0 the arp request goes out, the response comes in, but on the vifX.0 interface the arp response is gone. dom0# tcpdump -ni eth0 arp who-has 10.32.2.51 tell 10.32.7.70 arp reply

> Dear CentOS-Community, > > we are facing the following issue: > > A secondary ip address seems to be automatically added to a nic which > causes several issues in our setup. Hi, Can you show as the config of eno4? And can you diff the config of eno1 and eno4. Looks like there is a difference somewhere. Regards, Simon > > > This server is equipped with four nics

I should have what i want to achive. The server is intended as a host for VMs. Our network has multiple VLANs, and the VMs will be connected to different VLANS. The interface eno1 is for host traffic and eno2 is connected to the trunk port of the switch, making the different VLANS availabel to the VMs via the br0. I want to use a VLAN-aware br0, so that I specify in my VM config (on the host

Hi, see the log below root at AsteriskSlave:~# ip addr 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever inet6 ::1/128 scope host valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever 2: p3p1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu

Hi, I'm not sure what sort of diagram you mean, but I'll have a try. Does this help? It sounds like I need to do something to enable routing on what I've labelled "NIC3" on the diagram - can you please explain what I need to do? [image: Inline image 1] Regards, Phill On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Ajey Gore <ajeygore@gmail.com> wrote: > Can you please drop a

Hi all, I have done some tests for the new attributes "check" and "type", could you please help to have a check? And I have some questions about the patch, please help to have a look, Thank you! The questions: 1. in step 4 below, the error message should be updated: Actual results: XML error: invalid mac address **check** value: 'next'. Valid values are

Laine wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: sendmail [mailto:justsendmailnothingelse@gmail.com] On Behalf > Of Laine Stump > Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 4:12 PM > To: libvirt-users@redhat.com > Cc: Lentes, Bernd > Subject: Re: [libvirt-users] still possible to use traditional bridge network > setup ? > > On 03/16/2015 10:08 AM, Lentes, Bernd wrote: > >

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The original post was over 300,000kb so I didn''t spam the list with it -TE. | | | Thank you for your quick and helpful response. | | I didn''t understand that the virtual interface eth0:1 doesn''t count as a separate instance from eth0. | I am sorry to ask for further assistance and would appreciate any help. The error