On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 06:23:55PM -0500, Stephen E. Hargrove wrote:
> I've been chasing a problem now for a few days, and it's driving me nuts.
> Hopefully someone here can shed some light on my obviously darkened (at
> best) understanding.
>
> Two NICs:
> 192.168.2.1 - internal network
> 192.168.1.10 - connects to DSL router
> 192.168.1.254 - DSL router/Modem
Does the DSL modem have two associated IP's as well -- 192.168.1.254 and
also the 66.x.x.x address you mention below?
Are the "internal network" and "connects to DSL" addresses above both residing
on one system? (that's what I assume but you don't say explicitly)
> I'm trying to let the external world access an internal webserver. On the
> DSL router (Cayman 3220-H), I've created a pinhole for incoming requests to
> port 80.
So in English, you're forwarding 66.x.x.x:80 on the Cayman to either
192.168.2.1:80 or 192.168.1.10:80 on your internal system?
About the internal system -- does it pass those packets on to some other
machine, or does it house the web daemon itself? At this point I'm a little
confused about your network topology.
> - If I point the pinhole to 192.168.2.1, attempting to access my webserver
> from outside the network results in a timeout.
The "outside network" in this sentence is The Internet? Or a DMZ between
your "home" network and the outside?
> - If I point the pinhold to 192.168.1.10 and use ipmasqadm portfw -a -P tcp
> -L 192.168.1.10 80 -R 192.168.2.1 80, the system responds that the page
> contains no data.
How are 192.168.1.0 and 192.168.2.0 connected?
> I'm specifically requesting
> http://66.xxx.xxx.xxx/index.html, which does exist.
>
> - If I configure Apache to listen to 192.168.1.10:80, the system responds
> that the website is unreachable.
Which system?
> I'm using IP Masquerade to mask all traffic on the internal network out
> through 192.168.1.10 and the router.
_and_ the router? Please explain what that means.
Which network -- 192.168.2.0 or 192.168.1.0 -- do you mean by the "internal"
network?
I'm doing something similar to your scheme at my house, works fine, but it
looks like either your setup is more complicated than mine, or else you're
confusing things unnecessarily.
I think what would help me the most is if you could describe your network
layout a little more -- specifically, where does the web server live, how many
machines are actually involved, and which network addresses reside where?
--
Michael Jinks, IB
Systems Administrator, CCCP
finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for public key
Vote Duke! http://www.entertaindom.com/pages/duke2000/home.jsp
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
