On 11/05/10 10:40, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 05/10/2010 06:20 AM, Kahlil Hodgson wrote:
>> This gives me a very clean and clear separation between inside my
>> network and outside, and no one outside my network is going to see my
>> RFC1918 address space.
> 
> I weep every time I see someone advocate NAT for security reasons.  It's 
> ridiculous.

I agree 100% and was not the intent of the comment.  This is more an
organisational approach based on what I've seen and done in the past.
Being organised does contribute to security ;-)

> Routing policy is definitely required for a multi-homed system such as 
> Jussi presented, but NAT is totally superfluous.  It adds an extra layer 
> of complexity that makes the system more difficult to diagnose and 
> configure, and contributes nothing of value in return.

Now that I understand Jussi's set up a little better (all the components
seem to be fully internet facing) I also agree 100% with that.

> John Pierce's advice was simple and correct.  If you don't want to set 
> up ifup-post scripts of your own, you can use shorewall.  Shorewall is 
> actually more complex, but you don't have to understand much about the 
> "ip" tool to use it.

Understanding a bit about the "ip" tool and policy-based routing (and
routing in general) will help to understand the configuration you have
suggested, and mapping it to his needs.

>       interfaces:
> inet  eth0    -       norfc1918,nosmurfs,tcpflags
> inet  eth1    -       norfc1918,nosmurfs,tcpflags
> lan   virbr0  -       dhcp
>
>       zones:
> fw    firewall
> inet  ipv4
> lan   ipv4
>
>       policy:
> $FW   all     ACCEPT
> inet  inet    DROP
> all   inet    ACCEPT
> all   all     REJECT  info
>
>       providers:
> isp0  1       1       main    eth0    62.236.221.78   track,balance
> isp1  2       2       main    eth1    62.220.237.126  track,balance
>
>       route_rules:
> lo    -       isp0    11000
> eth0  -       isp0    11000
> eth1  -       isp1    11000
> virbr0        -       isp1    11000

Nice use of providers and route_rules.  Only one bridge, the one that
libvirtd brings up by default.  Shorewall probably has to start after
libvirtd for this to work.  All Jussi has to do is to mod this and his
xen-startup scripts to use the same bridge.

Kal

<<attachment: kahlil_hodgson.vcf>>

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Reply via email to