On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Patrick wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Alejandro Imass
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
On 29/08/2013 09:52, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>
>>>
>
> [.
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Patrick wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>>> On 29/08/2013 09:52, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>>
[...]
> Aliases should have a netmask of 255.255.255.255. What you seein
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>> On 29/08/2013 09:52, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>>>
>
> Hi Frank thanks for taking the time to try to replicate this. Here is
> all the detailed info
>
> 8.1-RELEASE
>
> em0: flags=88
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
> On 29/08/2013 09:52, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>>
Hi Frank thanks for taking the time to try to replicate this. Here is
all the detailed info
8.1-RELEASE
em0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500
options=209b
ether 00:31:88:bd:b9:3
On 29/08/2013 09:52, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
On 29/08/2013 02:08, Alejandro Imass wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Frank Leonhardt
wrote:
On 28/08/2013 19:42, Patrick wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Alejandro Imass
wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 5:42 AM, Frank Leonhardt
wrote
On 29/08/2013 02:08, Alejandro Imass wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
On 28/08/2013 19:42, Patrick wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Alejandro Imass
wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 5:42 AM, Frank Leonhardt
wrote:
[...]
Sorry guys - I had not intention o
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
> On 28/08/2013 19:42, Patrick wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Alejandro Imass
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 5:42 AM, Frank Leonhardt
>>> wrote:
[...]
> Sorry guys - I had not intention of upsetting the EzJa
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Patrick wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 5:42 AM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>>> On28/08/2013 00:19, Patrick wrote:
[...]
> I don't think that's true though in the case of jails. On the host
> system, yes,
On 28/08/2013 19:42, Patrick wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 5:42 AM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
On28/08/2013 00:19, Patrick wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Alejandro Imass
wrote:
[...]
(Tidied up so all now bottom posted)
I can
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 5:42 AM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
>> On28/08/2013 00:19, Patrick wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Alejandro Imass
>>> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>
>> (Tidied up so all now bottom posted)
>>
>> I can conf
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 5:42 AM, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
> On28/08/2013 00:19, Patrick wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Alejandro Imass
>> wrote:
>>>
[...]
>
> (Tidied up so all now bottom posted)
>
> I can confirm that you shouldn't be seeing this behaviour because I don't. I
> don
On28/08/2013 00:19, Patrick wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Patrick wrote:
That's not the behaviour I see. My jail has a private and public IP.
Hi Patrick, thanks for your reply.
The issue is actually more basic and it's becau
Hi Alejandro,
That's how I've got things setup, too, but I'm not seeing the same
behaviour. So I was wondering if there was something different about
your setup such as using NAT to allow a jail with a private IP to
access the internet at large.
Patrick
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Alejandr
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Patrick wrote:
> That's not the behaviour I see. My jail has a private and public IP.
>
Hi Patrick, thanks for your reply.
The issue is actually more basic and it's because the same network
card has multiple IPs on the same subnet so the routing table always
choo
That's not the behaviour I see. My jail has a private and public IP.
$ ifconfig bce1
bce1: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500
options=c01bb
ether a4:ba:db:29:7a:1b
inet 192.168.42.23 netmask 0x broadcast 192.168.42.23
media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT )
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a machine with several public IPs on the same NIC and I bound
> one of those IPs to a jail created with EzJail. Suppose the scenario
> is something like this:
>
> em0
> 190.100.100.1
> 190.100.100.2
> 190.100.100.3
> 190.100.
Hi,
I have a machine with several public IPs on the same NIC and I bound
one of those IPs to a jail created with EzJail. Suppose the scenario
is something like this:
em0
190.100.100.1
190.100.100.2
190.100.100.3
190.100.100.4
In the jail we are bound only to 190.100.100.4
The default router is
17 matches
Mail list logo