the vlan interfaces each into their own
FIB (btw,. has anyone ever done that?)?
Yes, from FreeBSD-7.1 and beyond, there is support
for up to 16 routing tables. Use the setfib command
to select routing table for outgoing connections.
So, I interpret your response as that I am correct, I have
(to the router) for each of the vlans short of
tucking the ezjails behind the vlan interfaces each into their own
FIB (btw,. has anyone ever done that?)?
Yes, from FreeBSD-7.1 and beyond, there is support
for up to 16 routing tables. Use the setfib command
to select routing table for outgoing
Subject: Re[2]: FreeBSD 7.1, routing tables, rc.conf
AvdO Здравствуйте, Arjan.
AvdO I mean:
AvdO options ROUTETABLES=2
AvdO Then I do manually:
AvdO setfib 0 route add default G.A.T.E1
AvdO setfib 1 route add default G.A.T.E2
AvdO in rc.conf I can do for FIB0:
AvdO defaultrouter=GATE1
Dear all,
While I'm at it, I don't seem to be able to get my head around some networking
items I observed (currently only vlan(4), not ng_vlan(4), if that makes a
difference):
- On my router, why do I have to set the base interface to promiscuous mode in
order to get packets from/to my vlans
Здравствуйте, Questions.
I have two routing tables.
How to setup two default routes for each routing table in rc.conf?
--
С уважением,
KES mailto:kes-...@yandex.ru
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http
Здравствуйте, Arjan.
I mean:
options ROUTETABLES=2
Then I do manually:
setfib 0 route add default G.A.T.E1
setfib 1 route add default G.A.T.E2
in rc.conf I can do for FIB0:
defaultrouter=GATE1
How to do same thing for other routing tables?
I exepct next feature to exists
What exactly do you mean with two routing tables?
--
Met vriendelijke groet / Kind Regards,
Worldmax Operations B.V.
Arjan van der Oest
Network Design Engineer
T.: +31 (0) 88 001 7912
F.: +31 (0) 88 001 7902
M.: +31 (0) 6 10 62 58 46
GPG: https://keyserver.pgp.com/ (Key ID: 07286F78
) fingerprint: 2E9F 3AE2 0A8B
7579 75A9 169F 5D9E 5312 0728 6F78
-Original Message-
From: KES [mailto:kes-...@yandex.ru]
Sent: donderdag 29 januari 2009 17:26
To: Arjan van der Oest
Cc: questi...@freebsd.org
Subject: Re[2]: FreeBSD 7.1, routing tables, rc.conf
Здравствуйте, Arjan.
I mean
Здравствуйте, KES.
far more. How to run services in order they use some routing tables?
for example: I want that bind use FIB1 instead of FIB0
By default all programms use FIB0.
It will be handy If it will possible to configure that in rc.conf like
this:
apache_enable=YES
apache_fib=1
17:26
AvdO To: Arjan van der Oest
AvdO Cc: questi...@freebsd.org
AvdO Subject: Re[2]: FreeBSD 7.1, routing tables, rc.conf
AvdO Здравствуйте, Arjan.
AvdO I mean:
AvdO options ROUTETABLES=2
AvdO Then I do manually:
AvdO setfib 0 route add default G.A.T.E1
AvdO setfib 1 route add default
Здравствуйте, Questions.
Is there any options to set routing table for service?
For example: rc.conf
named_enable=YES
named_fib=2
so it will be run as:
setfib 2 /usr/sbin/named -t /var/named -u bind
instead of
/usr/sbin/named -t /var/named -u bind
--
С уважением,
KES
In the current configuration I use a default gateway (and no routing
daemon) in the subnet addressed by NIC1. Now of course, if a client in an
arbitrary different class c subnet contacts the server using the ip
address of NIC2, it gets a reply from NIC1.
How can I cange this? I'd like the server to answer
(and no routing
daemon) in the subnet addressed by NIC1. Now of course, if a client in an
arbitrary different class c subnet contacts the server using the ip
address of NIC2, it gets a reply from NIC1.
How can I cange this? I'd like the server to answer via the interface the
client uses when
(and no routing
daemon) in the subnet addressed by NIC1. Now of course, if a client in an
arbitrary different class c subnet contacts the server using the ip
address of NIC2, it gets a reply from NIC1.
You should give more details about your configuration.
If any client on the class B on NIC2 can contact
Greetings,
I recently had to rebuild my brother's all in one box to get a SATA
controller working. It is now running 7.0 release and was previously
using courier and the mail system. With this rebuild, I have switched
him over to sendmail and most things are working, but I discovered a
small
At 12:16 PM 8/19/2008, Derrick Ryalls wrote:
Greetings,
I recently had to rebuild my brother's all in one box to get a SATA
controller working. It is now running 7.0 release and was previously
using courier and the mail system. With this rebuild, I have switched
him over to sendmail and most
On Aug 19, 2008, at 10:16 AM, Derrick Ryalls wrote:
For example, if I was relaying for example.org on port 2345, I would
specify
example.org:2345 and that is the port it would use to talk to
example.org.
Now that I have switched to sendmail, I don't see a way to set the
destination port on a
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 19, 2008, at 10:16 AM, Derrick Ryalls wrote:
For example, if I was relaying for example.org on port 2345, I would
specify
example.org:2345 and that is the port it would use to talk to
example.org.
Now that I
On Aug 19, 2008, at 12:01 PM, Derrick Ryalls wrote:
NOQUEUE: SYSERR(root): /etc/mail/sendmail.cf: line 1718: unknown
configuration line relay_port_587, P=[IPC], F=mDFMuXa,
S=EnvFromSMTP/HdrFromSMTP, R=EnvToSMTP, E=\\r
Aug 19 11:56:50 rncserver sm-mta[70987]: NOQUEUE: SYSERR(root):
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 19, 2008, at 12:01 PM, Derrick Ryalls wrote:
NOQUEUE: SYSERR(root): /etc/mail/sendmail.cf: line 1718: unknown
configuration line relay_port_587, P=[IPC], F=mDFMuXa,
S=EnvFromSMTP/HdrFromSMTP, R=EnvToSMTP,
I've put together a router for work - it's a 7-Stable box, with 3
dual-port NICs in it.
It's in use by our test/dev folks, and I've been asked to
enable/configure multicast on it. It has one port on the production
LAN (192.168.123.0/24), and the other 5 on the test/dev networks
(10.0.0.0/24,
This may have nothing to do with FreeBSD, but maybe someone will have a
suggestion:
We have servers A, B and C connected to three different ISPs on 3 continents.
As of few days ago A and C cannot talk to each other (the routing problem is
upstream of
all end-point ISPs so who knows when
0xff00
Opened by PID 14740
$ netstat -nr
Routing tables
Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire
default10.10.1.254UGS 029107 fxp0
10.8.0.0/2410.8.0.2 UGS 0 215 tun0
10.8.0.2
address' question which Mr. Seaman avoided
...heh, heh heh. Good job with the wording guys. I smiled brightly when
I went through this ;)
Since I've replied but clipped out any further context, I'll add a
bit... I agree with David in that this is purely a routing issue.
What (IMHO) it comes down
This strikes me as a noob question but in 10 years of
freebsd, I've never wrapped my brain around it and
it seems to be causing me problems this time.
I have many aliases on many servers. Some services
listening on an alias address seem to return the packets
out the alias address as shown in
Chris Pratt wrote:
I'm now setting up a bind server in which the third alias
is the address for incoming DNS queries. It appears
it's responding but even though the queries come in
on the third alias, they go out through the primary
address or more specifically, the packet count is
incremented
On Jul 25, 2008, at 10:12 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote:
Chris Pratt wrote:
I'm now setting up a bind server in which the third alias
is the address for incoming DNS queries. It appears
it's responding but even though the queries come in
on the third alias, they go out through the primary
address
for each of
your aliases with a value of 'lo0'. Correlate all the entries in the
routing table and you'll be able to determine what exits where.
I'm not sure why this question doesn't come up more frequently as it
can be problematic, especially in regards to jails (which are
implemented using IP
-host traffic, you'll see a host entry for each of
your aliases with a value of 'lo0'. Correlate all the entries in the
routing table and you'll be able to determine what exits where.
I'm not sure why this question doesn't come up more frequently as it
can be problematic, especially in regards
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 4:50 AM, Yuri Pankov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The MadDaemon wrote:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Yuri Pankov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The MadDaemon wrote:
List,
I'm having a problem with a dual-homed host running 7.0-RELEASE with
regards to traffic on one of
(Sorry, I replied to Yuri only by mistake)
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 10:49 AM, The MadDaemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Yuri Pankov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The MadDaemon wrote:
List,
I'm having a problem with a dual-homed host running 7.0-RELEASE with
regards
List,
I'm having a problem with a dual-homed host running 7.0-RELEASE with
regards to traffic on one of the interfaces that I'm hoping someone
knows something about.
The goal of this box is to run Nessus on bge0 only (which is plugged
into a trunk port on a switch), keeping fxp0 free as the
The MadDaemon wrote:
List,
I'm having a problem with a dual-homed host running 7.0-RELEASE with
regards to traffic on one of the interfaces that I'm hoping someone
knows something about.
The goal of this box is to run Nessus on bge0 only (which is plugged
into a trunk port on a switch),
My organisation has successfully used FreeBSD to set up a VPN between
three sites.
Now, in order to facilitate a phone system using VOIP between two of
those sites, I have
attempted to enable multi-cast routing between those sites.
I looked at the mrouted manual, and attempted to configure
I had this weird problem today, and I would like to know what caused it:
I have two home servers, on different locations, on two ADSL lines using
dynamic DNS. One is running Debian, the other FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE.
I usually ssh from one to the other. Today, the debian server had a
public
On Friday 16 May 2008 12:32:35 Manolis Kiagias wrote:
I had this weird problem today, and I would like to know what caused it:
I have two home servers, on different locations, on two ADSL lines using
dynamic DNS. One is running Debian, the other FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE.
I usually ssh from one to
I have two home servers, on different locations, on two ADSL lines using
dynamic DNS. One is running Debian, the other FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE.
I usually ssh from one to the other. Today, the debian server had a
public (internet) IP ending in 255. The FreeBSD 7.0 system refused to
communicate with
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
I have two home servers, on different locations, on two ADSL lines
using
dynamic DNS. One is running Debian, the other FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE.
I usually ssh from one to the other. Today, the debian server had a
public (internet) IP ending in 255. The FreeBSD 7.0 system
routing / erasing and reconfiguring routing table in 7.0
- Trying the IP address directly instead of the dyndns.org name (clearly
not any type of DNS problem)
- Restarting the router connected to 7.0
Traceroute gave a result like:
traceroute xxx.dyndns.org
traceroute to xxx.dyndns.org
i don't think it's freebsd version dependent, unless developers made a bug.
all these systems are behind ADSL routers and use NAT. Their internal
addresses are in the 192.168.0.X range.
I could easily consider this a problem of the (cheap) ADSL routers, but 6
very likely. yesterday i
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
i don't think it's freebsd version dependent, unless developers made
a bug.
all these systems are behind ADSL routers and use NAT. Their internal
addresses are in the 192.168.0.X range.
I could easily consider this a problem of the (cheap) ADSL routers,
but 6
very
Manolis Kiagias wrote:
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
i don't think it's freebsd version dependent, unless developers
made a bug.
all these systems are behind ADSL routers and use NAT. Their
internal addresses are in the 192.168.0.X range.
I could easily consider this a problem of the (cheap) ADSL
but WHAT are external IP's of these routers. this is important.
if the problem host is A.B.C.255 check if routers external IP isn't
A.B.C.something
No, I just checked again with DynDNS update logs and all three routers had
very different IP addresses at the time I was trying.
try freebsd
Checking with the internal log of the router confirmed the suspicions of
people answering my question: The adsl router is responsible for the problem
with the 255 address. It seems it cuts out these addresses as some kind of
attack. No changes in configuration (firewall, protection and so on)
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
Checking with the internal log of the router confirmed the suspicions
of people answering my question: The adsl router is responsible for
the problem with the 255 address. It seems it cuts out these
addresses as some kind of attack. No changes in configuration
,
Robert
+++
The routing table display indicates the available routes and their sta-
tus. Each route consists of a destination host or network, and
a gateway
to use in forwarding packets. The flags field shows a
collection of
information about the route stored
-mingling
network layer routing information with layer 2 ARP information. The only
entries with Expire values are actually ARP entries. (Note the MAC
address os Gateway.)
Expire is in seconds remaining until the entry expires and is no longer
used.
--
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences
wish people would stop top-posting!
The Expire entry is the result of FreeBSD's unfortunate co-mingling
network layer routing information with layer 2 ARP information. The only
entries with Expire values are actually ARP entries. (Note the MAC
address os Gateway.)
Expire is in seconds
I would like an explanation on each field it command netstat - rn,
example:
Flags,Refs,Use,Expire
In Flags: UGS, UC, UHLW, UH
Somebody can explain me ?
Thanks,
Daniel
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
a static route
-net 192.168.2.0 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0
and it started to work. But here is something I still do not understand.
The given gateway 192.168.0.1 was already the default gateway. Why do I
need to add another gateway to the routing table to make it work? I have
similar installations
128
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff00
office1adsl# netstat -nr
Routing tables
Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire
default192.168.2.1UGS 0 1262107 fxp0
127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 UH 0 127122
Internet - [Hw Router] (LAN1: 192.168.2.0/24) - [
192.168.2.138 GatewayComp 192.168.0.1 ] -- (LAN2: 192.168.0.0/24)
I would like to access a computer from LAN1 to LAN2.
Perform the following and post the results of:
- ping from GatewayComp to pc on 0.0 network and a pc
Steve Bertrand wrote:
Internet - [Hw Router] (LAN1: 192.168.2.0/24) - [
192.168.2.138 GatewayComp 192.168.0.1 ] -- (LAN2: 192.168.0.0/24)
I would like to access a computer from LAN1 to LAN2.
Perform the following and post the results of:
- ping from GatewayComp to
- ping from pc on 0.0 network to 192.168.2.138
Well, I cannot do this from here. Those computers are X terminals,
they do not run inetd nor sshd. I cannot login from here and I cannot
leave now, but I can do it later if necessary.
- sysctl -a net.inet.ip.forwarding (on the GatewayComp)
Celso Viana wrote:
I have 2 machines (A and B) interconnected by a cable network
crossover; added the following addresses on the network card:
Machine A: 192.168.1.1/24
Machine B: 10.10.1.1/24
Question: How would for these machines to communicate, adding routes manually?
The easiest would
Hi All,
I have 2 machines (A and B) interconnected by a cable network
crossover; added the following addresses on the network card:
Machine A: 192.168.1.1/24
Machine B: 10.10.1.1/24
Question: How would for these machines to communicate, adding routes manually?
Thanks
--
Celso Vianna
BSD
For example you can try using
192.168.1.1/24 on A and 192.168.1.2/24 on B and it will work!
- Original Message
From: Celso Viana [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Saturday, December 8, 2007 9:03:03 AM
Subject: Manual routing
Hi All,
I have 2 machines (A and B
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
There shouldn't need to be any changes to the routing tables needed if they are
directly connected. If they do need to be on seperate subnets, then you can add
aliases to each interface so that they see each other as on the same subnet.
On machine
need to be any changes to the routing tables needed if they are
directly connected. If they do need to be on seperate subnets, then you can add
aliases to each interface so that they see each other as on the same subnet.
On machine A:
# ifconfig interface alias 10.10.1.2 255.255.255.0 (Any number
Hello,
I am trying to combine my file server and router into a single box.
Before you tell me this is a bad idea, let me remind you this is a
personal installation (not intensive file serving) and the machine and
NICs are fairly beefy.
FreeBSD 7 supports ZFS. From there, NFS and Samba
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FreeBSD 7 supports ZFS. From there, NFS and Samba are easy. I've been
using Solaris for this, but it's rather archaic in many ways, and the
only reason I use it is for the stable ZFS support. Everything else in
Solaris - given my needs - is a poor match.
People have
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 09:08:37PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FreeBSD 7 supports ZFS. From there, NFS and Samba are easy. I've been
using Solaris for this, but it's rather archaic in many ways, and the
only reason I use it is for the stable ZFS support. Everything
..
I know next to nothing about routed(8) and RIP, nor why you might prefer
it to static and cloned routing, but taking it out of the mix might help
with debugging until your basic routing and filtering works right?
I think it's hard to be NAT even because I've disabled ipfilter
2007/11/24, Ian Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
ipfw works fine too for these sorts of network policy separation :)
So ipfilter is not recommended by you guyz?
If that wasn't a typo, this is a non-contiguous netmask. I suspect you
want 255.255.255.224, assuming the default router is in the same
be adding
temporary firewall rules to log everything in and out per interface ..
I know next to nothing about routed(8) and RIP, nor why you might prefer
it to static and cloned routing, but taking it out of the mix might help
with debugging until your basic routing and filtering works right?
HTH
might prefer
it to static and cloned routing, but taking it out of the mix might help
with debugging until your basic routing and filtering works right?
I think it's hard to be NAT even because I've disabled ipfilter and the
problem still. I thought I would just set gateway_enable=YES and things
On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 13:41:51 -0200
Alaor Barroso de Carvalho Neto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2007/11/24, Ian Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
No I didn't mean that; use your own favourite packet filter, any of
them can handle what you've described. Bill suggested pf - lots of
people seem to like
First off, what's the output of sysctl net.inet.ip.forwarding? If
it is 0, then reboot and see if it starts working.
The return was: net.inet.ip.forwarding 1
Routed is running, named is running, the server itself can ping to any
network, I don't know what else to test.
. 10.10/16 should
access
only the 192.168.1 network, but it's not a problem if they had
access to
internet too.
How I would set up my rc.conf with my static routes?
This is beyond the scope of routing. You'll need to install a packet
filter
2007/11/23, Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm going to the server room to test the command. And yes, the DNS is
working properly. I just came from the room and I did the command dig @
192.168.1.1 google.ca and it said no server reached, then I did dig @
127.0.0.1 google.ca and it worked!
set up my rc.conf with my static routes?
This is beyond the scope of routing. You'll need to install a packet
filter. The best at this time is probably pf:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=pfctlsektion=8apropos=0manpath=FreeBSD+6.2-RELEASE
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi
the internet and
10.10/16, but shouldn't access the academic network. 10.10/16 should
access
only the 192.168.1 network, but it's not a problem if they had access to
internet too.
How I would set up my rc.conf with my static routes?
This is beyond the scope of routing. You'll need
OK guyz, I did some tests and I found the error, like you said, it's a
config problem with the routes, I thought the routed daemon would care of it
for me but it seems like it don't. Please I ask you to forget the scenario I
said before, now what i have is:
The dns server is now with the IP
. 10.10/16 should access
only the 192.168.1 network, but it's not a problem if they had access to
internet too.
How I would set up my rc.conf with my static routes?
This is beyond the scope of routing. You'll need to install a packet
filter. The best at this time is probably pf:
http
not a problem if they had
access to
internet too.
How I would set up my rc.conf with my static routes?
This is beyond the scope of routing. You'll need to install a packet
filter. The best at this time is probably pf:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=pfctlsektion
Alaor Barroso de Carvalho Neto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2007/11/23, Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Alaor Barroso de Carvalho Neto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, I have IPFIlTER installed, but if I would want to everybody ping to
everybody and then block the things in the firewall, it
2007/11/23, Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Alaor Barroso de Carvalho Neto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2007/11/23, Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Alaor Barroso de Carvalho Neto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, I have IPFIlTER installed, but if I would want to everybody
ping to
By ping, mean ping. I don't know what have access means, but I know
what
ping means.
Well I say have access because the icpm would be blocked, but I would still
have communicationwith the network even if I didn't ping. But yeah, for
meright now ping and have access is the same once the
when it can't acquire routing information.
What is the output of netstat -rn?
--
Bill Moran
http://www.potentialtech.com
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any
Hi, I have some troubles building my internet gateway to my network. I
already have a gateway machine running under linux, with two interfaces eth0
(192.168.1.1) and eth1 (external world), but I installed a new server
running FreeBSD6.2 with ipfilter and squid, in the test time with had the ip
Alaor Barroso de Carvalho Neto wrote:
If I turn off linux and set the rl0 to 192.168.1.1 it
stop resolving names but can ping to anywhere. Help!!!
in the rc.conf
gateway_enable=YES
defaultrouter=X.X.X.X
I don't know if I quite understand on which machine things are breaking,
but if it is a
Sorry my english skills, I'm brazilian and I'm not very familiar with the
language, but I'm gonna try to explain it clearly:
LINUX SERVER
private network 192.168.1.1
external network x.x.x.x
FREEBSD SERVER
private network 192.168.1.240
external network x.x.x.x
DNS SERVER
private network
Sorry,
searchdomain ...
nameserver 192.168.1.2
not 192.168.1.1 as I've said before.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL
In response to Alaor Barroso de Carvalho Neto [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Sorry my english skills, I'm brazilian and I'm not very familiar with the
language, but I'm gonna try to explain it clearly:
LINUX SERVER
private network 192.168.1.1
external network x.x.x.x
FREEBSD SERVER
private network
The nameserver is the 192.168.1.2 in the resolv.conf, sorry my fault. I'm
gonna copy the rc.conf and paste here. But the routes are OK and still OK
for any time when the machine is not the main gateway and have some few
clients using it as gateway, if it was a config problem it wouldn't work
Alaor Barroso de Carvalho Neto wrote:
Sorry,
searchdomain ...
nameserver 192.168.1.2
not 192.168.1.1 as I've said before.
What about:
# dig @192.168.1.2 google.ca
Also, I don't know if it has any impact, but my resolv.conf shows just
'search mydomain.com' as opposed to
Hi all,
I have a server running 6.2-stable that experiences mbuf leakage
if I perform policy routing with ipfilter. This is independent of the
hardware as I have moved the disk to a different machine with different
MB, NICs etc and had the same result.
The server is running quagga, postfix
gets a valid
public IP address, which is used to connect to the internet.
This works pretty well, until dhclient tries to get a new private
address from the dhcp-server. After that i get a message similar to
Nov 6 11:43:26 fitu vpnc[5560]: routing loop to yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy (where
yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy
I am sincerely sorry if this is the wrong place to post. Please direct
me to the proper forum if possible.
A couple of entries for bannerconnect.com have appeared in the
routing table of my laptop. In one case the entry is in both
destination and gateway columns and in the other, my IP
Eric Crist wrote:
Hey,
We have a problem here at the office that I'd like to solve with pf and
source-based routing.
How would I write a rule with pf to route any traffic from 10.1.1.1
across a specific interface?
Perhaps some permutation of the following?
pass in on $int_if route
Hey,
We have a problem here at the office that I'd like to solve with pf
and source-based routing.
How would I write a rule with pf to route any traffic from 10.1.1.1
across a specific interface?
Thanks!
-
Eric F Crist
Secure Computing Networks
You guys are sweethearts. We're ship-shape again :)
Thanks all who contributed.
-Modulok-
On 8/7/07, Modulok [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a bizarre entry in the routing table on one my machines. What
is it, and how do I delete it? The output of netstat -rnf inet is
shown below
the algorithm and do the math
to figure out what it is.
aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd = 0xAABBCCDD, where AA = hex(aaa), BB = hex(bbb), etc.
In particular, 0xc0a80132 is the hex equivalent of 192.168.1.50.
An IP address + netmask can normally be represented in the routing
table via the slash
From: Josh Carroll [EMAIL PROTECTED]
root# route delete 00xc0a80132
[1] 37343
route: writing to routing socket: No such process
delete net 0: not in table
0xc0a80132: Command not found.
[1] + Exit 1route delete 0
root# route delete 00xc0a80132
[1] 37343
In the last episode (Aug 07), Modulok said:
I have a bizarre entry in the routing table on one my machines. What
is it, and how do I delete it? The output of netstat -rnf inet is
shown below:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire
00xc0a80132
20
port or find the wrong line in ipfw fwd rules?
Best regards,
Narek
-Original Message-
From: Julian Elischer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 2:02 AM
To: Narek Gharibyan
Subject: Re: Policy - based Routing problem Need help
Narek Gharibyan wrote:
Yes your written
that.
Best regards,
Narek
-Original Message-
From: Julian Elischer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 2:02 AM
To: Narek Gharibyan
Subject: Re: Policy - based Routing problem Need help
Narek Gharibyan wrote:
Yes your written rules are correct, You think exactly
I want
I have a bizarre entry in the routing table on one my machines. What
is it, and how do I delete it? The output of netstat -rnf inet is
shown below:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif Expire
00xc0a80132 link#1 UCS 00 bge0
root# route delete 00xc0a80132
[1] 37343
route: writing to routing socket: No such process
delete net 0: not in table
0xc0a80132: Command not found.
[1] + Exit 1route delete 0
root# route delete 00xc0a80132
[1] 37343
route: writing to routing
On Aug 7, 2007, at 12:10 PM, Modulok wrote:
I have a bizarre entry in the routing table on one my machines. What
is it, and how do I delete it? The output of netstat -rnf inet is
shown below:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use
Netif Expire
00xc0a80132
101 - 200 of 639 matches
Mail list logo
