Thanks for your quick reply!
Paul Anderson wrote:
>
> 1. The best network calculator on the web is:
>
> http://www.agt.net/public/sparkman/netcalc.htm
That looks like a handy tool.
A question: the calculator gives me only options for 2 or 4 networks. Is it
then impossible to do 3 networks like I did? One with size of 64 and two with
size of 32?
> Your ISP should not care about how you have subnetted. They have routed all
> traffic for that subnet to you (if they did their job right).
That's good to hear.
> What you doing wrong is a large question. From my point of view the answer
> is a lot. I see no firewall here. Even with subnets you have left yourself
Actually I'm _going_ to use a firewall. But before I set up the firewall I'll
have to get the basic routing going on.
> For my part, on my internal network I use one to one mapping of NAT address
> to outside addresses using an internal and external NAT pool. I then tie
I'm going to do this too. The public addresses are for a DMZ-network only
(where we provide web services and stuff). I've tried to access the net with a
pool of masqueraded addresses and it works fine.
> The way you have things setup the default gateway for your clients is
> outside the mask you have set for the client so that the default gateway is
> unreachable.
So I've calculated the subnet masks wrong?
My calculations were:
> net name netmask ip
>
> .128 dmz1 .192 .129 - .190
> .192 dmz2 .224 .193 - .222
> .224 router .224 .225 - .224
In those calculations my client (.129) is in the same network as the gateway
(.190). But I guess it is my intention of making 64+32+32 network that is
wrong?
I should do 64+64 or 32+32+32+32 network?
So correct networks / netmasks would be:
net name netmask ip
.128 dmz1 .224 .129 - .158
.160 dmz2 .224 .161 - .191
.192 dmz3 .224 .193 - .222
.224 router .224 .225 - .224
Or have I totally misunderstood something?
Regards,
Peter
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
