Hi
Firstly, I would like to say hi. I work at a computer software company
in Australia.
Now, I have read the manual (repeatedly) and I have also searched the
mailing list archives and lots on google. While I can find plenty about
FTP and NAT, I can't find what to do when you are not using NAT an
Wolfgang Pichler wrote:
> Our own internal net is 172.16.0.0/24 - i'd now like my firewall to
> redirect packets coming from 172.16.0.0/24 with destination address
> 10.0.43.0/24 to go over the vpn tunnel.
Assuming you've configured your tunnel(s) correctly, both firewalls
should have routes to t
On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 12:38:41PM +0200, Wolfgang Pichler wrote:
> on my openbsd firewall i have a vpn tunnel running to the 10.0.43.0
> subnet from an other company. The VPN tunnel works fine when i ping from
> the firewall to the other subnet using my external address (ping -I
> 81.223.6.246 10.
Am Mi, den 07.07.2004 schrieb Fisher, James L. um 13:48:
> When I did this back in OpenBSD 3.1 days (and permuting to your
> subnets), I had to:
> (1) put the following line in /etc/rc.local:
> route add -net 10.0.43.0/25 a.b.c.d
> (where a.b.c.d is the address of the external interface of th
Hello,
I'm planning an upgrade of the internet connection at the place where I
work and am faced with upgrading our current Packeteer traffic shaper as
well. Since these babies are quite expensive if you wish to deploy them
in a redundant setup I managed to get the beancounters interested in an
Ope
When I did this back in OpenBSD 3.1 days (and permuting to your
subnets), I had to:
(1) put the following line in /etc/rc.local:
route add -net 10.0.43.0/25 a.b.c.d
(where a.b.c.d is the address of the external interface of the remote
OpenBSD firewall...the other company in your case), and
On 5 Jul 2004 12:54:48 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Per-Olov Sjöholm)
wrote:
>Is is possible to fix the interface a'la Solaris where you can specify
>interfaces for example "hme0:1", "hme0:2" etc where you have a separate
>interface name for each IP on the same physical interface..
The solaris sy
it's the nature of the protocol. Use nat-t and you should not have any
problem...
On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 04:04:59PM -0700, cell-X wrote:
> How about the ability to handle IPSec passthrough???
>
> I think both IPSec/PPTP passthrough abilities would be a big + for PF
> for people that are looking
hi all,
on my openbsd firewall i have a vpn tunnel running to the 10.0.43.0
subnet from an other company. The VPN tunnel works fine when i ping from
the firewall to the other subnet using my external address (ping -I
81.223.6.246 10.0.43.11).
Our own internal net is 172.16.0.0/24 - i'd now like m
