So, as per my understanding so far, packets are routed correctly from
internet to pppoe0, but responses from pppoe0 are going through pppoe1
which is wrong...
So...
1) internet packets pppoe0 got through correctly and worked.
2) pppoe0 response pppoe1 wrong and dropped by the ISP.
And I need
2008/1/20, Jussi Peltola [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 07:13:02AM +0200, Jussi Peltola wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 03:48:16PM +1100, Sunnz wrote:
pass out on pppoe1 route-to (pppoe0 pppoe0:peer) \
from any to pppoe0
I don't think that will work. Anyone trying
2008/1/21, Sunnz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
route-to
2)
pass out on pppoe1 route-to (pppoe0 (pppoe0:0)) inet from pppoe0:0 to any
3)
pass out on pppoe1 route-to (pppoe0 (pppoe0:0)) inet from pppoe0:0 to any
pass out on pppoe0 route-to (pppoe1 (pppoe1:0)) inet from pppoe1:0 to any
4)
pass out on
On 2008/01/21 00:31, Sunnz wrote:
So, do I need to use some kind of packet management with tag to get
route-to to work? Or would using reply-to suffice?
Just use reply-to, that's what it's for.
Opposite direction is only defined in the context of a state entry,
and reply-to is useful only in
Sunnz P=P0P?P8QP0:
2008/1/21, Sunnz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
route-to
2)
pass out on pppoe1 route-to (pppoe0 (pppoe0:0)) inet from pppoe0:0 to any
3)
pass out on pppoe1 route-to (pppoe0 (pppoe0:0)) inet from pppoe0:0 to any
pass out on pppoe0 route-to (pppoe1 (pppoe1:0)) inet from pppoe1:0 to
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 12:31:35AM +1100, Sunnz wrote:
Opposite direction is only defined in the context of a state entry,
and reply-to is useful only in rules that create state. - as far as I
know of, only TCP connections has states, but not UDP... so what I am
worried about is that reply-to
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 12:38:36AM +1100, Sunnz wrote:
2008/1/21, Sunnz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
route-to
2)
pass out on pppoe1 route-to (pppoe0 (pppoe0:0)) inet from pppoe0:0 to any
3)
pass out on pppoe1 route-to (pppoe0 (pppoe0:0)) inet from pppoe0:0 to any
pass out on pppoe0 route-to
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 12:18:26AM +1100, Sunnz wrote:
So, as per my understanding so far, packets are routed correctly from
internet to pppoe0, but responses from pppoe0 are going through pppoe1
which is wrong...
So...
1) internet packets pppoe0 got through correctly and worked.
2)
2008/1/21, Jussi Peltola [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
pf keeps state on UDP (and ICMP) just fine.
--
Jussi Peltola
Oh I see, that's very nice, thanks for all the help everyone!
--
Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
09
Just wondering has anyone ever used 2 PPPoE(4) connections on one real
interface and rather if it should work or not?
I only have one account with my ISP but they gave me 2 logins and up 4
concurrent logins are allowed with their TOS.
My hardware ethernet gem(4) is connected to a modem, with the
Sunnz P=P0P?P8QP0:
Just wondering has anyone ever used 2 PPPoE(4) connections on one real
interface and rather if it should work or not?
I only have one account with my ISP but they gave me 2 logins and up 4
concurrent logins are allowed with their TOS.
My hardware ethernet gem(4) is
2008/1/20, NetOne - Doichin Dokov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
You only have one defautl gateway, so the last pppoe session established
sets it up to it's interface. The behaviour you're observing is
absolutely normal. You should dig into pf's route-to, packet tagging and
state-keeping options if you
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 03:48:16PM +1100, Sunnz wrote:
pass out on pppoe1 route-to (pppoe0 pppoe0:peer) \
from any to pppoe0
I don't think that will work. Anyone trying to reach pppoe0 will not get
routed out on pppoe1.
pass in on pppoe1 route-to (pppoe0 pppoe0:peer) \
from
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 07:13:02AM +0200, Jussi Peltola wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 03:48:16PM +1100, Sunnz wrote:
pass out on pppoe1 route-to (pppoe0 pppoe0:peer) \
from any to pppoe0
I don't think that will work. Anyone trying to reach pppoe0 will not get
routed out on
2008/1/20, Jussi Peltola [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 03:48:16PM +1100, Sunnz wrote:
pass out on pppoe1 route-to (pppoe0 pppoe0:peer) \
from any to pppoe0
I don't think that will work. Anyone trying to reach pppoe0 will not get
routed out on pppoe1.
pass in on
15 matches
Mail list logo
