internet router/gateway with NAT:
net.inet.ip.mforwarding
net.inet.ip.multipath
I've already enabled:
net.inet.ip.forwarding
Perhaps the first two are needed for 'exotic' services like Bonjour, etc.?
Thanks,
Doug
Thanks very much. I'm trying to keep it as simple as possible, and yet I'm
wondering too about multiple NICs... another post.
--- On Tue, 9/15/09, Josh Hoppes josh.hop...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Josh Hoppes josh.hop...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: dhcpd and net.inet.ip.mforwarding / multipath
Hello,
I want to be sure that the following two sysctl variables are not needed for a
basic internet router/gateway with NAT:
net.inet.ip.mforwarding
net.inet.ip.multipath
I've already enabled:
net.inet.ip.forwarding
Perhaps the first two are needed for 'exotic' services like Bonjour, etc
I recently got accused by my ISP for disturbing traffic in our residential
network. Obviously my port in the house switch was generating massive
amounts of multicast traffic or atleast replying to incoming traffic.
My firewall was running OpenBSD 4.1 and had the net.inet.ip.mforwarding
set, had
Sorry I should know this but I'm sorta green. If I enable
net.inet.ip.mforwarding on all my routers, should that allow
OS X things like bonjour and iTunes music sharing to work
across the bridge?
Jonathan Whiteman wrote:
Sorry I should know this but I'm sorta green. If I enable
net.inet.ip.mforwarding on all my routers, should that allow
OS X things like bonjour and iTunes music sharing to work
across the bridge?
Bridge? Are you bridging or routing here? Please tell us more about
your
net.inet.ip.mforwarding on all my routers, should that allow
OS X things like bonjour and iTunes music sharing to work
across the bridge?
Bridge? Are you bridging or routing here? Please tell us more about
your network.
If you are ethernet bridging, as far as I know that will do nothing. If
you
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 01:04:59PM -0800, Jonathan Whiteman wrote:
yes it is bridging not routing, and its a vpn (OpenVPN) bridge to
complicate matters just a bit further. a simplified diagram
follows. i've used actual device names here and indicated the
bridged ones by enclosing them with {
Thank you both for your responses. I have made this diagram
clearer because I sort of *am* using the same subnet on both
sides of the bridge... or at least that was my intent, but
obviously the address ranges have to be separate on both sides
of the bridge even though the netmasks need to be the
Sorry just for the sake of correctness:
em0 and em1 are the devices on firewall 2, not en0 and en1...
thats a typo.
Jonathan Whiteman wrote:
Thank you both for your responses. I have made this diagram
clearer because I sort of *am* using the same subnet on both
sides of the bridge... or at
As far as I can see, for the broadcast protocols to work you need to use
the same subnet in both ends. The way I set a similar system up some
time ago was as follows:
| Public Network ---|
| |
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 02:46:57PM -0800, Jonathan Whiteman wrote:
Thank you both for your responses. I have made this diagram
clearer because I sort of *am* using the same subnet on both
sides of the bridge... or at least that was my intent, but
obviously the address ranges have to be
12 matches
Mail list logo
