On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Matthew Seaman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Allen wrote:
>
>> There was a post recently (Matthew Seaman's name comes to mind) that
>> suggested binding jails to addresses in the loopback range and then
>> using firewall rules to redirect the traffic accordingly
On Tuesday 08 July 2008 11:24:33 Mel wrote:
> On Monday 07 July 2008 18:51:33 David Allen wrote:
> > Granted, everything is really happening over the loopback address, but a
> > connection originating from the jailhost to a jail should appear to be
> > using the jailhost's IP address, or so I'd lik
Daniel Gerzo wrote:
Hello,
* Something like a loopback address inside the jail. It may be
127.0.0.2 instead of 127.0.0.1 but most software can be persuaded
to use it for loopback style things.
* The ability to map several IPs onto the jailed system by use of
NAT and re
Hello,
>* Something like a loopback address inside the jail. It may be
> 127.0.0.2 instead of 127.0.0.1 but most software can be persuaded
> to use it for loopback style things.
>
>* The ability to map several IPs onto the jailed system by use of
> NAT and redirect within
David Allen wrote:
There was a post recently (Matthew Seaman's name comes to mind) that
suggested binding jails to addresses in the loopback range and then
using firewall rules to redirect the traffic accordingly. There's a
possibility that may help in this case, but that layer of added
complex
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 2:24 AM, Mel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 07 July 2008 18:51:33 David Allen wrote:
>
>> Granted, everything is really happening over the loopback address, but a
>> connection originating from the jailhost to a jail should appear to be
>> using the jailhost's IP addr
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 2:01 PM, George Hartzell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Did you take the necessary steps to restrict the IP addresses on which
> sendmail on the host and the jail listen? The jail man page only
> says:
I don't think anyone would get too far with jails in general if the
jail
12:38
To
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
cc
Subject
Re: Jails and IP Aliasing
On Tuesday 08 July 2008 11:13:04 Ivailo Tanusheff wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I guess the problem is with your netmask and respectivly the broadcast
> adrresses for the jails.
> It should be:
>
> inet
On Tuesday 08 July 2008 11:13:04 Ivailo Tanusheff wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I guess the problem is with your netmask and respectivly the broadcast
> adrresses for the jails.
> It should be:
>
> inet 10.0.1.2 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.1.255
> inet 10.0.1.3 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.1.255
> in
On Monday 07 July 2008 18:51:33 David Allen wrote:
> Granted, everything is really happening over the loopback address, but a
> connection originating from the jailhost to a jail should appear to be
> using the jailhost's IP address, or so I'd like to think. If it doesn't,
> then the scenario is
Tanusheff
Deputy Head of IT Department
ProCredit Bank (Bulgaria) AD
Jason Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
07.07.2008 21:01
To
FreeBSD Questions
cc
Subject
Re: Jails and IP Aliasing
Hello,
On 2008.07.07 09:51:33, David Allen wrote:
> Unless I'm losin
Jason Morgan wrote:
On 2008.07.07 12:16:44, David Allen wrote:
# grep fxp0 /etc/rc.conf
ifconfig_fxp0="inet 10.0.1.2 netmask 0xff00"
ifconfig_fxp0_alias0="10.0.1.3 netmask 0x"
ifconfig_fxp0_alias1="10.0.1.4 netmask 0x"
ifconfig_fxp0_alias2="10.0.1.5 netmask 0x"
My
Did you take the necessary steps to restrict the IP addresses on which
sendmail on the host and the jail listen? The jail man page only
says:
To configure sendmail(8), it is necessary to modify
/etc/mail/sendmail.cf.
but you'll probably end up adjusting the DAEMON_OPTIONS lines of you
On 2008.07.07 12:16:44, David Allen wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Jason Morgan
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 2008.07.07 09:51:33, David Allen wrote:
> >> Unless I'm losing my mind, I'm encountering what seems to yet another
> >> gotcha with jails. The following has been dumbed do
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Jason Morgan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2008.07.07 09:51:33, David Allen wrote:
>> Unless I'm losing my mind, I'm encountering what seems to yet another
>> gotcha with jails. The following has been dumbed down for clarity and
>> brevity.
>>
>>
Hello,
On 2008.07.07 09:51:33, David Allen wrote:
> Unless I'm losing my mind, I'm encountering what seems to yet another
> gotcha with jails. The following has been dumbed down for clarity and
> brevity.
>
> -
> # hostname
> ja
Unless I'm losing my mind, I'm encountering what seems to yet another
gotcha with jails. The following has been dumbed down for clarity and
brevity.
-
# hostname
jailhost.example.org
# host jailhost
jailhost.example.org has addr
17 matches
Mail list logo
