Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:42:06 -0500 (CDT) From: Nick Rogness <nick@rogness.net> To: John Wilson <john_wilson100@excite.com> Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ipfw routing/netmask problem Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0104301734460.77575-100000@cody.jharris.com> In-Reply-To: <6458253.988661425565.JavaMail.imail@almond.excite.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001, John Wilson wrote: > > /---------------------\ > > | router 90.91.92.1 | > > \---------------------/ > > | > > | > > /---------------------\ /---------------------\ > > | fxp0 90.91.92.2/30 |---| fxp1 90.91.92.?/? | > > \---------------------/ \---------------------/ > > -| | |----------- > > | | | > > /-------\ /-------\ /-------\ > > | NAT 1 | | NAT 2 | | DMZ | > > \-------/ \-------/ \-------/ > > > > All I gotta do is fill in the missing blanks :) > > > fxp1= 90.91.92.17 netmask 255.255.255.240 > > All DMZ machines (90.91.92.18 -> 90.91.92.30) are setup with the > same netmask (255.255.255.240) and point to .17 as there gateway. > > > Sounds good! Do I need to do anything special on the router? Route the network: 90.91.92.16/28 to your BSD machine: 90.91.92.2 Also, Make sure that the router ethernet interface has a .252 subnet mask or you will have problems. > > As a side question, do you think a single 600MHz P3 w/128Mb RAM (and > not too many firewall rules) can handle ~100 NAT clients? Depends on what they are doing...but it should be sufficient. On another side note, I would seriously look at splitting off your DMZ to another network...but, of course, it's your ass not mine. Nick Rogness <nick@rogness.net> - Keep on Routing in a Free World... "FreeBSD: The Power to Serve!" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0104301734460.77575-100000>