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
st
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 ma
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?
> 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 sanit
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,
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
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 offic
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
https://listman.redhat.com/mai
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.
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
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
netw
11 matches
Mail list logo
