Re: Simple router

2003-02-18 Thread Bret Hughes
On Mon, 2003-02-17 at 18:21, Ric Tibbetts wrote: There is so many things wrong with this I don't know where to begin, but I'll try. See below. If I have misunderstood the setup I apologize. Yeah, I'm doing it at home too. That's why this one is bugging me so bad. I thought at first maybe

RE: Simple router

2003-02-18 Thread Larry Brown
You have to use masquerading for the third box that you want to pass packets to. If you don't use masquerading then the third box which is not directly connected to the internet would have a private address which cannot communicate on the internet. The only way around it would be to get enough

RE: Simple router

2003-02-17 Thread Spanke, Alexander
Just activate the IP_Forwarding and update your routing table -Original Message- From: Tibbetts, Ric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 2:56 PM To: Redhat List Subject: Simple router All; I need a simple way to just pass packets. I have 3 devices, and two

Re: Simple router

2003-02-17 Thread Tibbetts, Ric
That's what I thought too. I have one working at home (as a full firewall). But it's on a different distro (shouldn't matter, this is kernel stuff). So on this one, I did the usual: echo 1 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward Set the the second card with a dummy address, and added it to the

Re: Simple router

2003-02-17 Thread Tibbetts, Ric
Anyone? This is easy! I KNOW it's easy. I have one running at home, and it works great. I've just missed something really dumb. The setup: A RH 8.0 box with 2 NICs. 1 with a real address connected to the network, the second with a dummy IP (192.168.100.1) that runs a crossover to another box.

Re: Simple router

2003-02-17 Thread Warren Johnson
Tibbetts, Ric wrote: Then on the client pc, I set it to route through the primary IP of the sever. shouldn't it route through the inside interface or eth1 on the server? -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe

Re: Simple router

2003-02-17 Thread Tibbetts, Ric
Warren Johnson wrote: Tibbetts, Ric wrote: Then on the client pc, I set it to route through the primary IP of the sever. shouldn't it route through the inside interface or eth1 on the server? I used the term server really loosely. I have 3 boxes and two network drops in my office.

Re: Simple router

2003-02-17 Thread Warren Johnson
Tibbetts, Ric wrote: I've been doing this with both Redhat Mandrake for years. But now.. with RH 8.0, it doesn't work. Ric, I'm using RH 8.0 and doing the exact same thing. I use the RH8.0 box as a router for a mixed Windows/Linux network. It also has iptables, DNS and SSH and everything

Re: Simple router

2003-02-17 Thread Ric Tibbetts
Warren Johnson wrote: Tibbetts, Ric wrote: I've been doing this with both Redhat Mandrake for years. But now.. with RH 8.0, it doesn't work. Ric, I'm using RH 8.0 and doing the exact same thing. I use the RH8.0 box as a router for a mixed Windows/Linux network. It also has iptables,

Re: Simple router

2003-02-17 Thread Edward Dekkers
In this case, there's no firewall (don't need one). So iptables is not running. So that's out. The nics both work, although only one has an address. By all rights all the things you listed should make it work. The link lights are definately on on all connected points? For the sake of sanity,

Re: Simple router

2003-02-17 Thread Ric Tibbetts
Edward Dekkers wrote: In this case, there's no firewall (don't need one). So iptables is not running. So that's out. The nics both work, although only one has an address. By all rights all the things you listed should make it work. The link lights are definately on on all connected points?