On 4/20/2013 11:01 PM, Karl Denninger wrote:
> On 4/20/2013 9:36 PM, Karl Denninger wrote:
>> I don't think so -- gre is not involved in the config.
>>
>> On 4/20/2013 7:59 PM, Steven Hartland wrote:
>>> - Original Message - From: "Karl Denninger"
>>> ...
My "ordinary" NAT entry is s
On 4/20/2013 9:36 PM, Karl Denninger wrote:
> I don't think so -- gre is not involved in the config.
>
> On 4/20/2013 7:59 PM, Steven Hartland wrote:
>> - Original Message - From: "Karl Denninger"
>> ...
>>> My "ordinary" NAT entry is simply "nat 1 ip from any to any via em1",
>>> which wo
Be sure default gateway is properly cobfigured on the client not only the
tunnel
Sami
On Apr 21, 2013 6:42 AM, "Karl Denninger" wrote:
> I don't think so -- gre is not involved in the config.
>
> On 4/20/2013 7:59 PM, Steven Hartland wrote:
> > - Original Message - From: "Karl Denninger"
I don't think so -- gre is not involved in the config.
On 4/20/2013 7:59 PM, Steven Hartland wrote:
> - Original Message - From: "Karl Denninger"
> ...
>> My "ordinary" NAT entry is simply "nat 1 ip from any to any via em1",
>> which works fine for ordinary "on the client" traffic; no pro
- Original Message -
From: "Karl Denninger"
...
My "ordinary" NAT entry is simply "nat 1 ip from any to any via em1",
which works fine for ordinary "on the client" traffic; no problems with
that.
...
Just a stab in the dark, as I vaguely remember something similar, do you
also need to
Here's the situation.
I have a FreeBSD-Stable 9.1 system that has been running through the
various versions of FreeBSD for the last several years. It uses ipfw
and NAT to protect and serve PC clients along with other devices inside,
and has an outside connection as well. The topology looks like
