Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:06:03 -0800 From: "Crist J. Clark" <cristjc@comcast.net> To: Isaac Gelado <igf@tid.es> Cc: nbari@unixmexico.com Subject: Re: Routing Networks Message-ID: <20040114210603.GA49090@blossom.cjclark.org> In-Reply-To: <4004F329.1000902@tid.es> References: <52975.148.243.211.1.1074063556.squirrel@mail.unixmexico.com> <4004F329.1000902@tid.es>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 08:43:37AM +0100, Isaac Gelado wrote:
> Nicol?s de Bari Embr?z G. R. escribi?:
> >Hi all, I need some help routing or making Nat on a LAN.
> >
> >I have something like this:
> >
> >
> > I N T E R N E T
> > -----------------
> > ^ ^
> > | |
> >fxp0 public IP public IP
> > | |
> > FreeBSD server LINUX server
> > | |
> >dc0 192.168.10.1 |
> >dc1 192.168.1.1 ^ 192.168.1.3
> > ^ | ^
> > | | |
> > | | |
> > ----------------
> > | Switch/Hub |
> > ----------------
> > | |
> > ------------------ -----------------
> > | LAN A | | LAN B |
> > | 192.168.10.2-254 | | 192.168.1.4-100 |
> > ------------------ -----------------
> >
> >
> >What i want to do is that a computer on LAN A with an IP on the range of
> >192.168.10.2-254 can ping, telnet, ssh, etc. to a computer on LAN B
> >"192.168.1.X".
> >
> >How can i solve this problem, is this is a route or Nat problem ?
>
> I think it is a route problem. You must add next static route:
>
> - On the linux machine route all incoming packets with dest addr
> 192.168.10.x to 192.168.1.1
>
> It shouldn't be necesary a static route on the freebsd machine since it
> has a network device with an addr of LAN B.
This is correct. Things can get from LAN A to LAN B just fine in this
picture. The problem is that machines on LAN B won't be able to get
back to LAN A (i.e. your pings go from A to B, but the pongs never get
back from B to A). You'll have to touch that Linux box or touch the
routes on everything on LAN B to route 192.168.10.0/24 through
192.168.1.1.
> Of course you must run a
> route daemon in both machines (I supouse it's running now since they are
> working as gateways) and the previous route must be added to the route
> daemon running on the linux machine.
OK now here is the problem. Why does he need a routing daemon? I saw
no mention of RIP, OSPF, or any other dynamic routing protocol. Looks
like it's all static routes to me.
--
Crist J. Clark | cjclark@alum.mit.edu
| cjclark@jhu.edu
http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/ | cjc@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040114210603.GA49090>