Hi,
I have added an IP of the 2nd group of 254 addresses in a /23.
let's call them100.100.98.0 and 100.100.99.0
what's the correct way to set up the routing table for this and how my
rc.conf should look
Currently netstat shows something like the below
Destination
On 13/03/2013 14:59, Paul Macdonald wrote:
Hi,
I have added an IP of the 2nd group of 254 addresses in a /23.
let's call them100.100.98.0 and 100.100.99.0
what's the correct way to set up the routing table for this and how my
rc.conf should look
Currently netstat
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Da Rock
freebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au wrote:
On 01/13/12 17:11, Waitman Gobble wrote:
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Da Rock
freebsd-questions@**herveybayaustralia.com.aufreebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au
wrote:
On 01/13/12
El día Friday, January 13, 2012 a las 07:03:11AM -0800, Waitman Gobble escribió:
Hi,
Thanks. I've always heard countless rumors about WPA being wise :) I'll
take your advice and take a step up in technology. My stubborn
conservatism probably roots back to the time when not all devices could
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012, Waitman Gobble wrote:
Hello,
I am running 9.0-RC3 i386 on an Acer Aspire One D150. i am having trouble
with the wireless setup.
I have two wireless cards, the BCM94312MCG that came with it, and an
Atheros 5424/2424 that i swapped out. I can run the BCM with ndis and the
On Jan 13, 2012 7:19 AM, Matthias Apitz g...@unixarea.de wrote:
El día Friday, January 13, 2012 a las 07:03:11AM -0800, Waitman Gobble
escribió:
Hi,
Thanks. I've always heard countless rumors about WPA being wise :) I'll
take your advice and take a step up in technology. My stubborn
On Jan 13, 2012 7:38 AM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012, Waitman Gobble wrote:
Hello,
I am running 9.0-RC3 i386 on an Acer Aspire One D150. i am having trouble
with the wireless setup.
I have two wireless cards, the BCM94312MCG that came with it, and an
On 01/14/12 01:38, Warren Block wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012, Waitman Gobble wrote:
Hello,
I am running 9.0-RC3 i386 on an Acer Aspire One D150. i am having
trouble
with the wireless setup.
I have two wireless cards, the BCM94312MCG that came with it, and an
Atheros 5424/2424 that i swapped
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Waitman Gobble gobble...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 13, 2012 7:19 AM, Matthias Apitz g...@unixarea.de wrote:
El día Friday, January 13, 2012 a las 07:03:11AM -0800, Waitman Gobble
escribió:
Hi,
Thanks. I've always heard countless rumors about WPA
On 01/14/12 16:28, Waitman Gobble wrote:
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Waitman Gobblegobble...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 13, 2012 7:19 AM, Matthias Apitzg...@unixarea.de wrote:
El día Friday, January 13, 2012 a las 07:03:11AM -0800, Waitman Gobble
escribió:
Hi,
Thanks. I've always heard
Hello,
I am running 9.0-RC3 i386 on an Acer Aspire One D150. i am having trouble
with the wireless setup.
I have two wireless cards, the BCM94312MCG that came with it, and an
Atheros 5424/2424 that i swapped out. I can run the BCM with ndis and the
windows xp driver, and the Atheros with the ath
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:29 PM, Waitman Gobble gobble...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I am running 9.0-RC3 i386 on an Acer Aspire One D150. i am having trouble
with the wireless setup.
Hi, update-
i noticed if i start routed it complains...
p00ntang# routed
p00ntang# routed: wlan0
On 01/13/12 15:29, Waitman Gobble wrote:
Hello,
I am running 9.0-RC3 i386 on an Acer Aspire One D150. i am having trouble
with the wireless setup.
I have two wireless cards, the BCM94312MCG that came with it, and an
Atheros 5424/2424 that i swapped out. I can run the BCM with ndis and the
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Da Rock
freebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au wrote:
On 01/13/12 15:29, Waitman Gobble wrote:
Hello,
I am running 9.0-RC3 i386 on an Acer Aspire One D150. i am having trouble
with the wireless setup.
I have two wireless cards, the BCM94312MCG that
On 01/13/12 17:11, Waitman Gobble wrote:
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Da Rock
freebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au wrote:
On 01/13/12 15:29, Waitman Gobble wrote:
Hello,
I am running 9.0-RC3 i386 on an Acer Aspire One D150. i am having trouble
with the wireless setup.
I have
Le Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:17:19 -0700,
Doug Hardie bc...@lafn.org a écrit :
PF's route_to will return the packets to the proper router, but I have not
been able to figure out which ones those would be. The source IP
address can be any on either network and its highly likely that we
will see
On 27 August 2010, at 05:07, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:
Le Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:17:19 -0700,
Doug Hardie bc...@lafn.org a écrit :
PF's route_to will return the packets to the proper router, but I have not
been able to figure out which ones those would be. The source IP
address can be any
On 8/27/2010 9:09 PM, Doug Hardie wrote:
On 27 August 2010, at 05:07, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:
Le Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:17:19 -0700, Doug Hardiebc...@lafn.org a
écrit :
PF's route_to will return the packets to the proper router, but I
have not been able to figure out which ones those would
I have several servers with one ethernet interface. Currently it is connected
via a WAN to the internet. We are in the midst of switching to a different
provider. I would like to be able to operate with both temporarily until all
the users/services get switched. The new circuit is in and
At 06:26 AM 10/9/2008, Konrad Heuer wrote:
Hello,
I've a server box with four NICs addressing different subnets:
NIC1: one class c subnet of same class b network
NIC2: another class c subnet of same class b network
NIC3: local unrouted network
NIC4: local unrouted network
In the
Hello,
I've a server box with four NICs addressing different subnets:
NIC1: one class c subnet of same class b network
NIC2: another class c subnet of same class b network
NIC3: local unrouted network
NIC4: local unrouted network
In the current configuration I use a default gateway
I've a server box with four NICs addressing different subnets:
NIC1: one class c subnet of same class b network
NIC2: another class c subnet of same class b network
NIC3: local unrouted network
NIC4: local unrouted network
In the current configuration I use a default gateway (and no
David Allen wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:12 AM, Matthew Seaman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chris Pratt wrote:
Carefully not answering the 'why do these packets come from the
wrong address' question,
Deliberately addressing the question of 'why do these packets come
from the wrong
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
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:12 AM, Matthew Seaman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
On Jul 25, 2008, at 4:05 PM, David Allen wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:12 AM, Matthew Seaman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
Laszlo Nagy írta:
- 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
Hi,
I have this configuration:
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.
LAN1 machine is:
FreeBSD office1adsl.dyndns.org 6.2-RELEASE
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)
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-to {
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
On Tuesday 12 December 2006 09:49, Bret J. Esquivel wrote:
Hi,
I have a cable modem at my office with a /28 allocated. I have a FreeBSD 6.1
firewall/router in between the cable modem and the switch to other nodes. My
question is how could I add static routes to say my web server having
Hi,
I have a cable modem at my office with a /28 allocated. I have a FreeBSD 6.1
firewall/router in between the cable modem and the switch to other nodes. My
question is how could I add static routes to say my web server having an
external IP address but still going through the firewall box?
Bret J Esquivel wrote:
Hi,
I have a cable modem at my office with a /28 allocated. I have a FreeBSD 6.1
firewall/router in between the cable modem and the switch to other nodes. My
question is how could I add static routes to say my web server having an
external IP address but still going
In response to Bret J Esquivel [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I have a cable modem at my office with a /28 allocated. I have a FreeBSD 6.1
firewall/router in between the cable modem and the switch to other nodes. My
question is how could I add static routes to say my web server having an
external IP
Hi,
I have a cable modem at my office with a /28 allocated. I have a FreeBSD 6.1
firewall/router in between the cable modem and the switch to other nodes. My
question is how could I add static routes to say my web server having an
external IP address but still going through the firewall box?
-
From: Drew Tomlinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Douville [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: FreeBSD Questions freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 2:57 PM
Subject: Re: IP Routing Question
On 2/14/2006 11:43 AM Steve Douville wrote:
By default, it sets the netif to em0
OK
I'm trying to set up the routing table to force requests to certain IP
addresses to use a particular ethernet card. I've used the route command in a
number of ways, but still can't come up with how to force to use em1 instead of
em0, with the right gateway.
em0 is aaa.bbb.ccc.207
em1 is
Hi,
You can try using ipf filter to impose source-policy routing:
cat ipf.example
pass in quick on em1 to em1:192.168.1.2 from 10.1.0.0/16 to a.b.c.d/32
^d
ipf -f ipf.example
This way you will re-route all packets coming from source 10.1/16 to
destination a.b.c.d to go to address
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Goran Gajic
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 9:44 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: IP Routing Question
Hi,
You can try using ipf filter to impose source-policy routing:
cat ipf.example
pass in quick on em1 to em1:192.168.1.2 from
On 2/14/2006 5:44 AM Steve Douville wrote:
I'm trying to set up the routing table to force requests to certain IP
addresses to use a particular ethernet card. I've used the route command in a
number of ways, but still can't come up with how to force to use em1 instead of
em0, with the right
-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 1:45 PM
Subject: Re: IP Routing Question
What happens with a simple 'route add certain ip address
aaa.bbb.ccc.196? Or am I misinterpreting what you wish to achieve?
HTH,
Drew
___
freebsd-questions
By default, it sets the netif to em0
- Original Message -
From: Drew Tomlinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Douville [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: FreeBSD Questions freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: IP Routing Question
On 2/14/2006 11:17 AM Steve
Message -
From: Drew Tomlinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Douville [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: FreeBSD Questions freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: IP Routing Question
On 2/14/2006 11:17 AM Steve Douville wrote:
Weird stuff...
route add -host
--On Tuesday, February 14, 2006 11:40:45 -0800 Drew Tomlinson [EMAIL
PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/14/2006 11:17 AM Steve Douville wrote:
Weird stuff...
route add -host aaa.bbb.ccc.209 aaa.bbb.ccc.196 -ifp em1
Shouldn't this be:
route add -host aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd aaa.bbb.ccc.209
Where
Routing Question
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 24 Oct 2005 09:22:34 -0400, Lowell Gilbert
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ahnjoan Amous [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The short : I believe the problem I am having is due to routing. A DHCP
server sends me IP A.B.C.D with a default route of A.B.C.D. dhclient
isn't
handling this well and I
Jason Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am setting up a wireless subnet and, while the gateway (FreeBSD
system) is communicating fine with the wireless router, my other
subnet is not able to connect to the wireless router. Here is a
diagram of my network, I think it's fairly typical.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fabian Keil
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 5:58 AM
To: Jason Morgan
Cc: FreeBSD Questions
Subject: Re: Quick Routing Question
Jason Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am setting up
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 09:03:11AM -0500, Steve Bertrand wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fabian Keil
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 5:58 AM
To: Jason Morgan
Cc: FreeBSD Questions
Subject: Re: Quick Routing
Questions
Subject: Re: Quick Routing Question
Jason Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am setting up a wireless subnet and, while the gateway (FreeBSD
system) is communicating fine with the wireless router, my other
subnet is not able to connect to the wireless router. Here
9:42 PM
To: FreeBSD Questions
Subject: Quick Routing Question
I am setting up a wireless subnet and, while the gateway (FreeBSD
system) is communicating fine with the wireless router, my other subnet
is not able to connect to the wireless router. Here is a diagram of my
network, I think it's
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif
Expire
default70.183.13.193 UGS 024701xl0
10/24 link#3 UC 00 fxp0
10.0.0.1 00:d0:b7:44:f9:c6 UHLW0 903lo0
10.0.0.2
Mason General Hospital
http://www.masongeneral.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Morgan
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 9:42 PM
To: FreeBSD Questions
Subject: Quick Routing Question
I am setting up a wireless subnet
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 10:25:25AM -0500, Steve Bertrand wrote:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif
Expire
default70.183.13.193 UGS 024701xl0
10/24 link#3 UC 00 fxp0
10.0.0.1
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Morgan
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 11:03 AM
To: FreeBSD Questions
Subject: Re: Quick Routing Question
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 10:25:25AM -0500, Steve Bertrand wrote:
Destination
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 11:24:59AM -0500, Steve Bertrand wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Morgan
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 11:03 AM
To: FreeBSD Questions
Subject: Re: Quick Routing Question
On Tue
Jason Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 11:24:59AM -0500, Steve Bertrand wrote:
And again, tcpdump is a very good tool. The -i switch tells it what
interface to listen on, so if the wireless side of the router works
but you can't ping across to the cabled side, then
Ok, it looks like it was an issue with the default settings
on the Linksys (and is still somewhat of an issue). I can now
connect to systems in each of the two subnets and I also have
routing to the outside world from both subnets. My only
remaining issue is getting to the web app setup
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 06:37:16PM +0100, Fabian Keil wrote:
Jason Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 11:24:59AM -0500, Steve Bertrand wrote:
And again, tcpdump is a very good tool. The -i switch tells it what
interface to listen on, so if the wireless side of
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 12:42:27PM -0500, Steve Bertrand wrote:
Ok, it looks like it was an issue with the default settings
on the Linksys (and is still somewhat of an issue). I can now
connect to systems in each of the two subnets and I also have
routing to the outside world from
I never explicity set the FreeBSD machine to enable NAT
between these subnets. Should I do so? Do I just add another
natd_interface to rc.conf?
You do not want to do this. The below config in rc.conf is correct. It
states that nat will only be enabled for the external interface, for
both
On Nov 1, 2005, at 11:15 AM, Jason Morgan wrote:
...
Ok, it looks like it was an issue with the default settings on the
Linksys (and is still somewhat of an issue). I can now connect to
systems in each of the two subnets and I also have routing to the
outside world from both subnets. My only
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 03:10:44PM -0600, Eric F Crist wrote:
On Nov 1, 2005, at 11:15 AM, Jason Morgan wrote:
...
Ok, it looks like it was an issue with the default settings on the
Linksys (and is still somewhat of an issue). I can now connect to
systems in each of the two subnets and I
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Morgan
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 6:47 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Quick Routing Question
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 03:10:44PM -0600, Eric F Crist wrote
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 07:49:54PM -0500, Steve Bertrand wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Morgan
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 6:47 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Quick Routing Question
Bingo, it was the static route. The wireless router didn't
like getting connection attempts from 10.0.0.0 addresses.
Turns out, the FreeBSD machine was operating as advertised.
Now it's time to get IPSEC set up.
Awesome :)
You have any q's in your new venture that aren't related to
I am setting up a wireless subnet and, while the gateway (FreeBSD
system) is communicating fine with the wireless router, my other subnet
is not able to connect to the wireless router. Here is a diagram of my
network, I think it's fairly typical.
Wired Subnet (10.0.0.x)
Ahnjoan Amous [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The short : I believe the problem I am having is due to routing. A DHCP
server sends me IP A.B.C.D with a default route of A.B.C.D. dhclient isn't
handling this well and I don't know how to fix it. Windows as well as Linux
DHCP clients do not have a
El Dom 23 Oct 2005 20:22, Ahnjoan Amous escribió:
The long : I have a CellPipe ADSL router/bridge from Lucent. This device is
provided by our ISP. I am exploring the ZIPB functionality of the device to
allow my FreeBSD host to own the public IP. The basics of the configuration
for those
The short : I believe the problem I am having is due to routing. A DHCP
server sends me IP A.B.C.D with a default route of A.B.C.D. dhclient isn't
handling this well and I don't know how to fix it. Windows as well as Linux
DHCP clients do not have a problem with this and I am at my wits end trying
The short : I believe the problem I am having is due to routing. A DHCP
server sends me IP A.B.C.D with a default route of A.B.C.D. dhclient isn't
handling this well and I don't know how to fix it. Windows as well as Linux
DHCP clients do not have a problem with this and I am at my wits end
Dan Nelson wrote:
In the last episode (Apr 13), Kurt Buff said:
I have a FreeBSD 5.3 box running
postfix/amavisd-new/spamassassin/clamav. Currently, we have two
entrances to our network, one is the Watchguard FBIII for our T1, the
other is a PC running Win2k and Winproxy, serving our DSL line. The
Dan Nelson wrote:
In the last episode (Apr 13), Kurt Buff said:
I have a FreeBSD 5.3 box running
postfix/amavisd-new/spamassassin/clamav. Currently, we have two
entrances to our network, one is the Watchguard FBIII for our T1, the
other is a PC running Win2k and Winproxy, serving our DSL line. The
In the last episode (Apr 14), Kurt Buff said:
Dan Nelson wrote:
In the last episode (Apr 13), Kurt Buff said:
I have a FreeBSD 5.3 box running
postfix/amavisd-new/spamassassin/clamav. Currently, we have two
entrances to our network, one is the Watchguard FBIII for our T1,
the other is a PC
In the last episode (Apr 14), Kurt Buff said:
Dan Nelson wrote:
In the last episode (Apr 13), Kurt Buff said:
I have a FreeBSD 5.3 box running
postfix/amavisd-new/spamassassin/clamav. Currently, we have two
entrances to our network, one is the Watchguard FBIII for our T1,
the other is a PC
All,
I have a FreeBSD 5.3 box running
postfix/amavisd-new/spamassassin/clamav. Currently, we have two
entrances to our network, one is the Watchguard FBIII for our T1, the
other is a PC running Win2k and Winproxy, serving our DSL line. The PC
is starting to flake out, and I'd like to replace
Looks like I sent the first copy from an old address. Sorry if this dupes...
All,
I have a FreeBSD 5.3 box running
postfix/amavisd-new/spamassassin/clamav. Currently, we have two
entrances to our network, one is the Watchguard FBIII for our T1, the
other is a PC running Win2k and Winproxy, serving
In the last episode (Apr 13), Kurt Buff said:
I have a FreeBSD 5.3 box running
postfix/amavisd-new/spamassassin/clamav. Currently, we have two
entrances to our network, one is the Watchguard FBIII for our T1, the
other is a PC running Win2k and Winproxy, serving our DSL line. The
PC is
Good day!
Is it possible to tell cvsup to use another
machine's global access in fetching the freebsd source
updates??
Here's my office workstation setup:
(private ip) (pri/pub ip) (all public)
workstation router proxy server---internet
mail server
Mark Jayson Alvarez wrote:
Good day!
Is it possible to tell cvsup to use another
machine's global access in fetching the freebsd source
updates??
Here's my office workstation setup:
(private ip) (pri/pub ip) (all public)
workstation router proxy server---internet
Hello,
In using FreeBsd 5.2.1-Release I am running into some trouble. I have successfully
recompiled the kernel with support for atheros based wireless cards. I have also been
able to setup the card into access point Hostap mode correctly. I have tried the
bridging recommend in the FreeBSD
]
Sent: 11 June 2004 18:16
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Routing question
Perhaps if you post more info, we can come up with creative solutions for
you. My big question is why?
AFAIK, you cannot have more than one default gateway, unless you are using
netgraph to balance
]
Sent: 11 June 2004 18:12
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Routing question
Leon,
This is possible, but will require you to run static routes so that you can
manually manage the connections. You should be able to set the routing
metrics so that all your traffic from client D goes to B
I have a box with 5 nics.
Cal them A,B,C,D,E.
A B are different internet connections.
E is a connection to a mail server on a public /29
C D are connections for 2 differnet client networks.
Is it possible to have all traffic coming in via C sent to a default gateway
on A's network and
all
Perhaps if you post more info, we can come up with creative solutions
for you. My big question is why?
AFAIK, you cannot have more than one default gateway, unless you are
using netgraph to balance between network interfaces. However, you could
NAT C D to their respective public interfaces.
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 11:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: routing question
I am trying to configure a wireless router so I am redefining
routes and IP address of my system. After booting dhclient
I am trying to configure a wireless router so I am redefining routes and IP
address of my system. After booting dhclient ep0 works fine. After messing
around with the wireless router I was just going back to my ethernet connection
so I did:
ifconfig ep0 192.168.0.3 remove
arp -da
route
Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 11:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: routing question
I am trying to configure a wireless router so I am redefining
routes and IP address of my system. After booting dhclient
ep0 works fine. After messing around with the wireless router
I
I have a 4.9 box that's on a public IP and I want to configure Samba so it
only accepts connections from the private network (192.168.1). My question
is, can I do that with only 1 NIC card or do I have to add a second NIC for
the private LAN?
---Marius
You can do that within the smb.conf
Use SWAT, advanced options, I think just for the share...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Marius Kirschner
Sent: Monday, 9 February 2004 12:40
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Routing question
] On Behalf Of Marius
Kirschner
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 3:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Routing question -- Samba
I have a 4.9 box that's on a public IP and I want to configure Samba so
it
only accepts connections from the private network (192.168.1). My
question
is, can I do
On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 03:40:04PM -0500, Marius Kirschner wrote:
I have a 4.9 box that's on a public IP and I want to configure Samba so it
only accepts connections from the private network (192.168.1). My question
is, can I do that with only 1 NIC card or do I have to add a second NIC for
Hello everybody :)
I have a routing question and was wondering if FreeBSD was able to do this.
I have 2 ISPs (so 2 connections).
Can I use only one FreeBSD box as a gateway to:
- route LAN -- INTERNET (using connection 1)
- route DMZ -- INTERNET (using connection 2)
- route LAN -- DMZ (simple
v8.04
Subject: IPSEC Tunnel Routing question
I would like to route all traffic over a gif/ipsec tunnel
I have the following situation
Existing internet connection in building A
Building to building wireless(between building A and Building B)
To secure the traffic going across the wireless I would
I think I figured out the problem but am unsure how to fix it
To recap my situation is as follows
Internet connection located in Building A(independent of BSD boxes)
FreeBSD 5.1 machine located at Building A
FreeBSD 5.1 machine located at Building B
Building-To-Building wireless between building
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
