Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 12:36:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug White <dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@rush.net> Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: question about 2 subnets on the same switch. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.03.9904301232540.16807-100000@resnet.uoregon.edu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.990430025737.7628K-100000@cygnus.rush.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 30 Apr 1999, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> I recently got ADSL from pacbell and I have a weird problem that
> I have found a fix for, however i think the fix is a hack.
>
> pacbell gave me a /29 subnet (btw, only 5ip addresses stinks...)
Considering you only need one, that's pretty liberal. :)
> my goal was to still have ipfw filtering through my router/firewall
> (freebsd 4.0 that i keep quite current)
>
>
> ____________ ____________ ______________
> | ADSL modem |----| Fbsd Bridge|------|100mbit switch|
> `------------' `------------' `--------------'
> ^ ^ ^ ||| |||
> | | | 192.168 real IPs
> 216.99.74.57 | 216.99.74.58
> (gw address) | (xl0)
> no ip
> (de0)
^^^^^ Er? Shouldn't this be 216.99.74.57, or is PacBell
running their ADSL boxes in routing mode?
> the Bridge is running the net.link.ether.bridge + bridge_ipfw sysctls
> to forward packets, note that the de0 interface on the bridge doesn't
> have an IP address....
Ah, dummynet... I haven't set this up so you're on your own.
Unless the inside machines need the real IPs _BADLY_, I suggest running
natd on the FreeBSD box and running the entire network using 192.168.*.
This will save you money since you don't need thse static IPs.
Doug White
Internet: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu | FreeBSD: The Power to Serve
http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite | www.freebsd.org
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.03.9904301232540.16807-100000>