From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Mar 20 14:46:46 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from gargoyle.apana.org.au (gargoyle-xl0.apana.org.au [210.215.3.53]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4C3237B71D for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2001 14:46:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dougy@gargoyle.apana.org.au) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by gargoyle.apana.org.au (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f2KMkvP55973; Wed, 21 Mar 2001 08:46:57 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from dougy@gargoyle.apana.org.au) Received: from bryden.apana.org.au(203.3.126.129), claiming to be "bryden" via SMTP by gargoyle.apana.org.au, id smtpd6XPnk5; Wed Mar 21 08:46:53 2001 Message-ID: <01ab01c0b18f$98ca2c40$8300a8c0@apana.org.au> From: "Doug Young" To: "Tony Landells" Cc: "Mike Meyer" , References: <200103202233.JAA17881@tungsten.austclear.com.au> Subject: Re: suroute ?? Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 08:46:18 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Topology is typical ISP except that many of the "clients" have 2 / 8 / 16 public IPs. A quick workaround is to to enable NAT, however that defeats the object of running servers on the LAN .... all appear from outside to have the gateway IP address. Adding a route to the LAN subnet after connection has been established doesn't appear to be sufficient. I can't be the first to encounter this issue ... surely there has to be a more straightforward solution than messing around with apparently fragile perl scripts ?? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tony Landells" To: "Doug Young" Cc: "Mike Meyer" ; Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:33 AM Subject: Re: suroute ?? > > dougy@gargoyle.apana.org.au said: > > Seems like a rather messy solution to a simple problem. Is this the > > best / most technically correct solution ?? I'm trying to root out as > > many "home grown" fixes that have been inherited here as possible & > > replace them with "standard" versions where available. I'm sure this > > isn't the only situation on the planet where remote users with a few > > public IPs dialin to a POP. How does everyone else deal with it ?? > > Mike's solution would fix your "problem" as presented--that you have a > script which has stopped working. It would also be a "minimum change" > solution because all the rest of your setup should be the same. > > Given additional information (like what it's for), you'll get a different > solution. > > > Wayyyyyy back when, all the dialup users used SLIP, thankfully there > > aren't many of them left. However I've had better results with user- > > ppp than pppd and would like to move all the dialups over to user-ppp. > > Main challenge appears to be automating the "route add" after the link > > is up. > > One of the sad things about SLIP is that most implementations didn't > permit you to set up routing, so you needed hack solutions. > > PPP is much nicer because there's some address negotiation as part of > the protocol. > > However, without a good knowledge of your topology it's hard to say > what the best (or even a good) solution would be for you. > > Tony > -- > Tony Landells > Senior Network Engineer Ph: +61 3 9677 9319 > Australian Clearing Services Pty Ltd Fax: +61 3 9677 9355 > Level 4, Rialto North Tower > 525 Collins Street > Melbourne VIC 3000 > Australia > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message