Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 15:33:14 -0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> To: moos@degnet.baynet.de Cc: freebsd-hackers <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD-questions <questions@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Is this network possible with FreeBSD ??? Message-ID: <3276943A.446B9B3D@whistle.com> References: <326DFE77.549B@degnet.baynet.de> <32768197.775E@degnet.baynet.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > The problem: > Packets, adressed to internet had an IP-src-adr. of 192.168.3.1 and > and did not return to the FreeBSD-box. > I do not know what a solution could look like. Of course, because 192.168 is defined to be unroutable. you need to use address translation. This is a hack (against the standards) that linux has as standard (typical) and BSD has as an option sos@freebsd.org has implimeted translation, as have several others. > 3. FreeBSD: ifconfig ed0_a inet 192.168.3.1 > ifconfig ed0_b inet 1.2.3.253 netmask 0xffffffff alias > ISPA-router: ed0_b was configured to 192.168.3.103 and > ed0_b was configured to 1.2.3.36 and further > to push all packets for 1.2.3.253 to the FreeBSD-box > via ed0_b. > The problem: > Packets, adressed to internet had an IP-src-adr. of 192.168.3.1 and > and did not return to the FreeBSD-box. > I do not know what a solution could look like. you need to use address translation.. > > Darius Moos. > > Here my original mail for those that does not remember any more > > Darius Moos wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > i have an urgent problem with the network-setup of FreeBSD. > > I've set up FreeBSD-2.1.0 for a company (I never set up an other OS > > for any company). I was gave permission, to trash their linux and > > install FreeBSD-2.1.0 instead. The installation went fine but now > > i am running into a problem with their network-configuration. > > Their ISP (a real linux-fetishist) says "FreeBSD is TOO BRAINDAMAGED > > to handle this problem". I do not think so. The network-configuration > > is pictured below. Also more details are written below. > > Now my problem (maybe I AM braindamaged): > > 1. How to ifconfig the ether-device of the FreeBSD-box ? > > 2. How to set up the routing of the FreeBSD-box ? > > so that the FreeBSD-box acts as a mail- and WWW-proxy gateway for the > > company's private network. > > > > +---------------+ > > | FreeBSD-2.1.0 | > > |+-------------+| > > || NE 2000 || > > || 192.168.3.1 || > > || 1.2.3.253 || > > ++------o------++.... ed0_a > > | > > | > > ++-------o-------++.... ed0_b > > || NE 2000 || > > || 192.168.3.103 || > > || 1.2.3.36 || > > |+---------------+| > > | | > > | +-------+ > > | Router | ISDN o------------o ISP 1.2.3.x > > | +-------+ > > | | > > |+---------------+| > > || 100 MBit || > > || 192.168.3.104 || > > ++-------o-------++ > > | > > | > > ++-------o-----++ > > || 100 MBit || > > || 192.168.3.2 || > > |+-------------+| > > | | > > | 192.168.3.x | I assume that the aim is to have the linux box BOUNCE packets from the 10Mb ethernet BACK onto the 10Mb ethernet with a different address? how many 100 Mb machines are there? is the TA on the router an internal adapter or an external ISDN adapter? what ELSE is on the net? why is the ethernet on the router called ed0-b? what is trying to be achieved? > > > The linux that i have trashed had no problems with this configuration did it have address translation enabled to do this? > > BUT i do not know how to ifconfig the network device of the FreeBSD- > > machine and how to setup the correct routing. The FreeBSD-machine > > should be known with a registered IP in the internet. I've replaced the > > real registered IP with 1.2.3.253. All the other machines (except the > > router) in the company should run only on the private network > > 192.168.3.0. The FreeBSD-machine should be the email and WWW-proxy > > gateway for the private company network. ok, so, why BOUNCE? why not pipe the ISDN straight into the FreeBSD/Linux box? (just get a motorola bitsurfer and you're off and racing.. the problem as I see it is that FreeBSD supports address translation on PPP links but not on ethernet links, as it was thought that no-one would be so braindamaged as to try that.. sos@freebsd.org has recently implimented however. > > The problem so far: > > - When i ifconfig the network-card of the FreeBSD-machine with > > "ifconfig ed0 inet 1.2.3.253 netmask 0xffffffff", the > > 1.2.3.36-IP is not reachable and therefor unknown to the routing. > > - I can not use a netmask of 0xffffff00 for the ether-device of the > > FreeBSD-box. sure you can.... the netmask 255.255.255.255 stuff is only if your two addresses are on the same logical net, which yours are not.. > > - When i ifconfig the ether-device of the FreeBSD-box with > > "ifconfig ed0 inet 192.168.3.1 netmask 0xffffff00" and > > "ifconfig ed0 inet 1.2.3.253 netmask 0xffffffff alias" > > the outgoing packets never come back, since the FreeBSD-box sends > > its packets with src of 192.168.3.1 > > What i would need is a > > ifconfig ed0 inet 1.2.3.253 netmask 0xffffffff > > ifconfig ed0 inet 192.168.3.1 netmask 0xffffffff alias > > route add -net 1.2.3 ed0 you already have one of these because you have a 1.2.3 address already.. what you need (I believe) do NOT have the same network (192.168.3) on BOTH interfaces of teh router.. make the one with the freebsd box 192,168.4 then tell it that it reaches .3 via the router.. > > but ether-devices as destination in the route-statement are not allowed. > > Under the linux this was possible (the ISP says). it's also against the RFCs I believe. > > Now this situation is braindamaged itself, but this does not count as > > argument to the boss of this company. The boss had a running system > > with this network-configuration and he stands on the point that this > > has to be possible or the OS (FreeBSD) is not the right OS so far. > > Please please help me with this network-setup, so i can prove, that > > FreeBSD IS the right OS for all networking. > > BTW: this mail is closely related to my other mail about FreeBSD-support unforunatly you need to give more info, but if I get you right, then I think that even if linux can do this now, it's because they have broken something. do the machines with 192.168 addresses need to be able to reach the internet directly? if not then I've misunderstood the problem and it's actually easy. > > for HP-10/100-VG or Compex 100VG network-cards. > > > > Many thanks for all your help in advance. > > > > Darius Moos. > > > > -- > > > > email: moos@degnet.baynet.de > > -- > > email: moos@degnet.baynet.de
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3276943A.446B9B3D>