From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 20 23:58:28 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 586FB37B401 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:58:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cecov.masternet.it (cecov.masternet.it [194.184.65.7]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4F6843F3F for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:58:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gmarco@scotty.masternet.it) Received: from usul.scotty.masternet.it (freebsd.giovannelli.com [194.184.65.139]) by cecov.masternet.it (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h3L6xJNO084011; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 08:59:19 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from gmarco@scotty.masternet.it) Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.2.20030421085241.0275c600@194.184.65.7> X-Sender: gmarco@194.184.65.7 (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 08:59:58 +0200 To: Archie Cobbs From: Gianmarco Giovannelli In-Reply-To: <200304210125.h3L1P5me035041@arch20m.dellroad.org> References: <5.2.1.1.2.20030415070820.04610eb0@194.184.65.4> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mpd: PPTP call failed X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 06:58:28 -0000 At 20/04/2003, you wrote: >Gianmarco Giovannelli wrote: > > bind: Can't assign requested address > >... > > > vpn: > > set link type pptp > > set pptp enable originate incoming outcall > > set pptp self 81.75.144.245 > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >Most likely your mpd box doesn't own that IP address. Infact it doesn't ... it is owns by the Zyxel 645R (the wan side) which does a complete nat/pat to the inner FreeBSD box (that has IP 10.0.1.1 and the router's ethernet is 10.0.1.254). But if I can't use this address which one I should use ? The FreeBSD box has/knows only private IPs . Perhaps it is the idea behind this configuration which is wrong but I thought it could work, also because it seems to work in an other situation with only a side with a router that does the complete nat (the other side use ppp and a bridge 645M, so the wan IP address is on the tun0 device of the box). Any ideas ? Anyone else which has tried a setup like this ? Best Regards, Gianmarco Giovannelli , "Unix expert since yesterday" http://www.gufi.org/~gmarco