Bug#411254: IPs shouldn't disappear

2007-02-26 Thread Ola Lundqvist
tags 411254 + unreproducible thanks Hi Patrick Now I have tried to reproduce your problem, but was not able to. The only thing I can see that differs between your and mine setup (except for the ip-addresses of course) is that you had scope global secondary listed for both interfaces but I can har

Bug#411254: IPs shouldn't disappear

2007-02-18 Thread Ola Lundqvist
Hi Patrick Give me the output from: ip addr ifconfig route -n >From the host machine. Then tell me from where you want to drop packets and to where you want to drop it? Which ones have you added manually and how did you do that? Regards, // Ola On Sun, Feb 18, 2007 at 11:00:11AM +0100, Patri

Bug#411254: [Fwd: Re: Bug#411254: IPs shouldn't disappear]

2007-02-18 Thread Patrick Matthäi
It looks like: /sbin/iptables -I INPUT -s -j DROP All interfaces are called eth0:x and how I said, it only works with the ones which I have manualy added. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#411254: IPs shouldn't disappear

2007-02-18 Thread Ola Lundqvist
Hi On Sat, Feb 17, 2007 at 11:17:19PM +0100, Patrick Matthäi wrote: > The problem is for example, that today some kiddies ( sshd bruteforcer ) > tried to brute many vservers in our company. > Normaly I would set the attackers IP at the hostsystem with iptables to > DROP, but this works only with

Bug#411254: IPs shouldn't disappear

2007-02-17 Thread Patrick Matthäi
The problem is for example, that today some kiddies ( sshd bruteforcer ) tried to brute many vservers in our company. Normaly I would set the attackers IP at the hostsystem with iptables to DROP, but this works only with the hostsystem and "manualy added IPs (to vservers)". The IP that I give as

Bug#411254: IPs shouldn't disappear

2007-02-17 Thread Ola Lundqvist
Hi Patrick On Sat, Feb 17, 2007 at 07:49:40PM +0100, Patrick Matthäi wrote: > I'm sorry, I'm not native english. Neither am I :) > The problem is, that I can't control the interfaces of one ip about > iptables after I added a vserver with that. In this case I do not really understand. I think i

Bug#411254: IPs shouldn't disappear

2007-02-17 Thread Patrick Matthäi
I'm sorry, I'm not native english. The problem is, that I can't control the interfaces of one ip about iptables after I added a vserver with that. The people from linux-vserver.org said, this should be a way of newvserver and another vserver hoster said the same, he can control the ips about

Bug#411254: IPs shouldn't disappear

2007-02-17 Thread Ola Lundqvist
Hi Patrick On Sat, Feb 17, 2007 at 03:38:30PM +0100, Patrick Matthäi wrote: > Package: vserver-debiantools > Version: 0.3.4 > severity: wishlist > > Hello, > > In my opinion it's a bad idea, that I can't control the IP with iptables > from a vserver. Within a vserver you have no possibility to

Bug#411254: IPs shouldn't disappear

2007-02-17 Thread Patrick Matthäi
Package: vserver-debiantools Version: 0.3.4 severity: wishlist Hello, In my opinion it's a bad idea, that I can't control the IP with iptables from a vserver. For example if I add a vserver with the IP 192.168.0.5, the interface will disappear from ifconfig -a and I can't log / set rules e.g.