On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Jesse Vollmar wrote:
>
> NAT is fine with me, but that gateway isn't a VIP on my WAN. Are you saying
> that I would need to add it?
Ignore the gateway, you just need proxy ARP VIPs for the usable IPs.
The gateway is just an alias on your cable modem, same as your
>
>
> On cable you may be stuck with no other option than NAT or bridging,
> cable ISPs tend to be much less flexible with routing. Proxy ARP + NAT
> should work, you can disregard the gateway in that case assuming it's
> an IP alias on your current WAN gateway. If you bridge, you're going
> to nee
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Jesse Vollmar wrote:
>
> Part of the problem is that I am not exactly sure how they are delivering
> the IPs. The ISP is Charter. I purchased from them a "static 5 pack" which
> is a /29 routed subnet according to them. Here is what they sent me (I
> replaced the a
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Chris Buechler wrote:
> Is it really a gateway address, i.e. they have it assigned on their
> router, or are they actually routing you the entire IP block? Ideally
> it will be the latter, they can and should be routing additional space
> to one of your existing a
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Jesse Vollmar wrote:
>
> I'm not using CARP and I would like to use them with NAT. According to that,
> your reccomendation would be to use "other" VIPs. My only question is, will
> they route properly since the ISP has this new subnet using a different
> gateway ad
>
> Depends on exactly how they're routing them to you, and how you want
> to use them. If you want to use them with NAT, and you aren't using
> CARP, just add them as Other VIPs. IPs that are routed to you do not
> need ARP. If you're using CARP, add them as Other VIPs and make sure
> the ISP is
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 1:52 AM, Chris Buechler wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Jesse Vollmar wrote:
>> Hey guys,
>> after googling this for a while, I'm not finding any clear instructions for
>> doing this. I currently have a multi-wan scenario with failover configured.
>> I just purchas
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Jesse Vollmar wrote:
> Hey guys,
> after googling this for a while, I'm not finding any clear instructions for
> doing this. I currently have a multi-wan scenario with failover configured.
> I just purchased another static IP block from one of the ISPs and they are
Max Cristin wrote:
Hi Jesse,
I just had the same exact scenario. I had a DSL connection with a /29
subnet (5 usable ips), then last week I added another /29 subnet. The
new block is in a completely different subnet than the original one.
This is how I configure it. The original subnet was se
Hi Jesse,
I just had the same exact scenario. I had a DSL connection with a /29
subnet (5 usable ips), then last week I added another /29 subnet. The
new block is in a completely different subnet than the original one.
This is how I configure it. The original subnet was setup with CARP
virtu
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Evgeny Yurchenko wrote:
> John Sellens wrote:
>>
>> | From: Victor Padro
>> | | Again, use VLANs and configure the interfaces in Pfsense in order to
>> | adquire IPs from each subnet:
>> | | LAN: 192.168.10.1(or whatever you are using)
>> | WAN: xy.xy.xy.10
>> | WA
John Sellens wrote:
| From: Victor Padro
|
| Again, use VLANs and configure the interfaces in Pfsense in order to
| adquire IPs from each subnet:
|
| LAN: 192.168.10.1(or whatever you are using)
| WAN: xy.xy.xy.10
| WAN1: ab.ab.ab.ab
| WAN2(VLAN50): xy.xy.xy.20
| WAN3(VLAN60): xy.xy.xy.30
I
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:37 PM, John
Sellens wrote:
> | From: Victor Padro
> |
> | Again, use VLANs and configure the interfaces in Pfsense in order to
> | adquire IPs from each subnet:
> |
> | LAN: 192.168.10.1(or whatever you are using)
> | WAN: xy.xy.xy.10
> | WAN1: ab.ab.ab.ab
> | WAN2(VLAN50
| From: Victor Padro
|
| Again, use VLANs and configure the interfaces in Pfsense in order to
| adquire IPs from each subnet:
|
| LAN: 192.168.10.1(or whatever you are using)
| WAN: xy.xy.xy.10
| WAN1: ab.ab.ab.ab
| WAN2(VLAN50): xy.xy.xy.20
| WAN3(VLAN60): xy.xy.xy.30
I think that would requir
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Jesse Vollmar wrote:
> This is too hard for me to draw out. Sorry. I only have one physical cable
> modem that according to the ISP is having two subnets routed to it. However,
> subnet 1 has a different gateway than subnet 2 on the ISP end.
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Jesse Vollmar wrote:
> There is only one single modem. They have to share the same interface,
> because they come in on the same port. Unless of course you mean a virtual
> interface.
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Evgeny Yurchenko
> wrote:
>>
>> Jesse Vollma
This is too hard for me to draw out. Sorry. I only have one physical cable
modem that according to the ISP is having two subnets routed to it. However,
subnet 1 has a different gateway than subnet 2 on the ISP end.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Evgeny Yurchenko wrote:
> Jesse Vollmar wrote:
>
Jesse Vollmar wrote:
There is only one single modem. They have to share the
same interface, because they come in on the same port. Unless of course
you mean a virtual interface.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Evgeny
Yurchenko
wrote:
Jesse Vollmar wrote:
There is only one single modem. They have to share the same interface,
because they come in on the same port. Unless of course you mean a virtual
interface.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Evgeny Yurchenko wrote:
> Jesse Vollmar wrote:
>
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> after googling this for a while, I'm no
Jesse Vollmar wrote:
Hey guys,
after googling this for a while, I'm not finding any clear
instructions for doing this. I currently have a multi-wan scenario
with failover configured. I just purchased another static IP block
from one of the ISPs and they are now routing those to me (so they
s
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Jesse Vollmar wrote:
> Wouldn't that mean that the ISP would have to define the vlans on their end?
> That wouldn't be an option.
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Victor Padro wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Jesse Vollmar wrote:
>> > Hey guys,
>>
Wouldn't that mean that the ISP would have to define the vlans on their end?
That wouldn't be an option.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Victor Padro wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Jesse Vollmar wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> > after googling this for a while, I'm not finding any clear instr
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Jesse Vollmar wrote:
> Hey guys,
> after googling this for a while, I'm not finding any clear instructions for
> doing this. I currently have a multi-wan scenario with failover configured.
> I just purchased another static IP block from one of the ISPs and they are
23 matches
Mail list logo