On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 12:50:49PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 10/9/19 2:34 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 01:05:37PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> >> On 10/8/19 8:58 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:20:34AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
> H
On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 01:41:40PM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
> On 10/9/2019 4:10 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 11:22:51AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
> >> On 10/8/2019 10:58 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:20:34AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
> >>>
On 10/9/19 12:57 PM, Matthew Grooms wrote:
On 10/9/2019 2:50 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 10/9/19 2:34 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 01:05:37PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 10/8/19 8:58 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:20:34AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wro
On 10/9/2019 2:50 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 10/9/19 2:34 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 01:05:37PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 10/8/19 8:58 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:20:34AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi Matthew,
It's not clear
On 10/9/19 2:34 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 01:05:37PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 10/8/19 8:58 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:20:34AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi Matthew,
It's not clear why you are trying to assign multiple carp I
On 10/9/2019 4:10 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 11:22:51AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
On 10/8/2019 10:58 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:20:34AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi Matthew,
It's not clear why you are trying to assign multiple ca
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 01:05:37PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 10/8/19 8:58 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:20:34AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
> >> Hi Julien,
> > Hi Matthew,
> >
> >> It's not clear why you are trying to assign multiple carp IP address to
> >> two di
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 11:22:51AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
> On 10/8/2019 10:58 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:20:34AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
> >> Hi Julien,
> > Hi Matthew,
> >
> >> It's not clear why you are trying to assign multiple carp IP address to
> >> two
On 10/8/19 8:58 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:20:34AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi Matthew,
It's not clear why you are trying to assign multiple carp IP address to
two different interfaces from within the same IP subnet. Are you trying
to fail over a 2nd car
On 10/8/2019 10:58 AM, Julien Cigar wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:20:34AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi Matthew,
It's not clear why you are trying to assign multiple carp IP address to
two different interfaces from within the same IP subnet. Are you trying
to fail over a 2nd
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:20:34AM -0500, Matthew Grooms wrote:
> Hi Julien,
Hi Matthew,
>
> It's not clear why you are trying to assign multiple carp IP address to
> two different interfaces from within the same IP subnet. Are you trying
> to fail over a 2nd carp address or are you trying to
Hi Julien,
It's not clear why you are trying to assign multiple carp IP address to
two different interfaces from within the same IP subnet. Are you trying
to fail over a 2nd carp address or are you trying to improve
throughput/redundancy? If you just want to fail over a 2nd carp address,
assi
Hello,
I'd like to NAT outbound traffic from two different private networks
through two different interfaces, with CARP on top. I have 4 public IPS
available (193.x.x.89, 193.x.x.90, 193.x.x.91, 193.x.x.92).
I have two redundant router/firewall running FreeBSD 12 with CARP and
PF with the follo
--- Original Message ---
From: "Konstantin Kulikov"
Date: 21 February 2015, 20:55:54
> Hello.
>
> ipfw nat 1 config ip 1.2.3.4
> ipfw nat 2 config ip 1.2.3.5
> ipfw nat 3 config ip 1.2.3.6
> ipfw add nat 1 ip from 4.5.6.7/32 to any out via $ext
> ipfw add nat 2 ip from 4.5.6.0/24 to any
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:55:26PM +0400, Konstantin Kulikov wrote:
> ipfw nat 1 config ip 1.2.3.4
[...]
> Should work (untested though).
That looks about right. Thank you. I'll be testing tomorrow I think.
Once I got things working in a basic way I want to add in some traffic
shaping, but I'll
Hello.
ipfw nat 1 config ip 1.2.3.4
ipfw nat 2 config ip 1.2.3.5
ipfw nat 3 config ip 1.2.3.6
ipfw add nat 1 ip from 4.5.6.7/32 to any out via $ext
ipfw add nat 2 ip from 4.5.6.0/24 to any out via $ext
ipfw add nat 3 ip from 8.9.0.0/24 to any out via $ext
ipfw add nat 1 ip from any to 1.2.3.4 in v
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:46:04AM -0500, Paul A. Procacci wrote:
> There is a section in ipfw(8) labeled: 'NETWORK ADDRESS TRANSLATION (NAT)'
> In that section it details how to bind a nat instance to an ip address.
> (Namely, the ip argument)
I'm not sure how I missed that there can be multiple
Hi all.
With iptables, I can say something like:
-t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -s 4.5.6.7/32 -d 0/0 -j SNAT --to-source 1.2.3.4
-t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -s 4.5.6.0/24 -d 0/0 -j SNAT --to-source 1.2.3.5
-t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -s 8.9.0.0/24 -d 0/0 -j SNAT --to-source 1.2.3.6
So, traffi
Hello,
I could not figureout the answer to a question. Here is the situation:
PC A: Windows XP Pro.
PC B: FreeBSD 6.1, connected to internet, acting as a gateway for PC
A, with NAT (built by hanbook instructions
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/network-natd.html),
open f
> If you have multiple private ip's pointing to the same public ip will
> traffic originating from each individual ip going out find it's way back to
> the original internal ip on its way back in?
Yes.
--
Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.freebsd-servi
If you have multiple private ip's pointing to the same public ip will
traffic originating from each individual ip going out find it's way back to
the original internal ip on its way back in?
the man page states that inbound traffic will be handed to the last private
ip in the list, but it wasn't
21 matches
Mail list logo