SOLVED: Thanks all for your assistance.
SUMMARY:
- Kernel rebuilt with option IPFIREWALL and friends turned on (not
necessary if your ipfw modules work you should just be able to load
them, mine didn't for reasons I don't really have the time or
inclination to track down)
- OpenVPN configuration
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Morgan Reed wrote:
> Works like a charm, just one last thing I'd like to get squared away
> here though, currently OpenVPN is using a dynamically created tun
> device, I'd like to have a static /dev/tun0 exist prior to the
> /etc/rc.d/natd start launching (because
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 9:16 PM, Morgan Reed wrote:
>> And with ipfw nat you won't be needing ipdivert. Again, no harm.
>
> Yeah, I didn't think it should be necessary but something was trying
> to load it from within the jails and throwing an error, probably the
> natd startup script, not sure w
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Ian Smith wrote:
> Unless you needed to include FIREWALL_FORWARD, you really didn't need to
> build ipfw into the kernel, it's all loadable by module. No harm, but.
The ipfw_nat module was causing an instant panic at load and I was
going to have to rebuild my ker
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 17:44:30 +1100, Morgan Reed wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Morgan Reed wrote:
> > So it turns out I'd not bought bpf into the jails, however even with
> > that and raw_sockets enabled I'm still having no joy with natd.
> >
> > I've been looking at ipfw a bit tod
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Morgan Reed wrote:
> So it turns out I'd not bought bpf into the jails, however even with
> that and raw_sockets enabled I'm still having no joy with natd.
>
> I've been looking at ipfw a bit today but I've run into an issue,
> loading ipfw_nat causes my kernel to
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
> Why not just load the module?
Yeah, you got beaten to the punch on that one offlist, it's late in
the day here ;)
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/list
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 7:22 AM, Morgan Reed wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Morgan Reed
> wrote:
> > So it turns out I'd not bought bpf into the jails, however even with
> > that and raw_sockets enabled I'm still having no joy with natd.
> >
> > I've been looking at ipfw a bit today bu
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Morgan Reed wrote:
> So it turns out I'd not bought bpf into the jails, however even with
> that and raw_sockets enabled I'm still having no joy with natd.
>
> I've been looking at ipfw a bit today but I've run into an issue,
> loading ipfw_nat causes my kernel to
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Morgan Reed wrote:
> BPF is enabled for the jails, and the traffic is getting to where it
> needs to (but not via natd). I'll try enabling raw_sockets in the
> jails, it is entirely conceivable that natd requires that
> functionality.
So it turns out I'd not boug
On 11/22/2012 6:00 AM, Morgan Reed wrote:
Hi All,
Hi,
[snipped content]
Any suggestions here?
A quick one. Could you make a try using "ipfw nat" instead of natd?
I am not sure about divert socket and natd per jail, but NATing using
ipfw and libalias(which natd uses as well) works.
HTH, Niko
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 10:32 PM, Teske, Devin
wrote:
> I have created a boot script for managing vimages (downloadable as a FreeBSD
> package) and made a little write-up on how to use it...
> http://druidbsd.sf.net/vimage.shtml
As noted elsewhere, these are VIMAGE jails, but I'm managing them
m
Hmm, list was missing from reply-to on this one.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Morgan Reed
Date: Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 10:36 PM
Subject: Re: natd in a jail
To: Dewayne Geraghty
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Dewayne Geraghty
wrote:
> We run a lot of jails with kernel
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Simon Dick wrote:
> I've not used it myself, but this sound like something VIMAGE may be good
> for, basically it's a virtual tcp stack per jail, there's some docs at
> http://wiki.freebsd.org/Image but I seem to remember a more up to date one
> elsewhere but can't
On Nov 22, 2012, at 2:43 AM, wrote:
>> I've not used it myself, but this sound like something VIMAGE may be good
>> for, basically it's a virtual tcp stack per jail, there's some docs at
>> http://wiki.freebsd.org/Image but I seem to remember a more up to date one
>> elsewhere but can't find it
> I've not used it myself, but this sound like something VIMAGE may be good
> for, basically it's a virtual tcp stack per jail, there's some docs at
> http://wiki.freebsd.org/Image but I seem to remember a more up to date one
> elsewhere but can't find it at the moment!
AFAIK, VIMAGE is still expe
On 22 November 2012 04:00, Morgan Reed wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I've a bit of an odd query which I hope somebody may be able to
> assist with.
>
> I'm looking to set up several OpenVPN tunnels on a single machine
> (each residing in its own jail) and route data to different
> destinations over d
Hi All,
I've a bit of an odd query which I hope somebody may be able to
assist with.
I'm looking to set up several OpenVPN tunnels on a single machine
(each residing in its own jail) and route data to different
destinations over different tunnels by selectively routing the traffic
via a part
18 matches
Mail list logo
