Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 20 Jun 2012 20:51:26 +0300
From:      Sami Halabi <sodynet1@gmail.com>
To:        "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org, bz@freebsd.org, freebsd-jail@freebsd.org, freebsd-pf@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: VNET
Message-ID:  <CAEW+ogYegAzytOB8UOZzdxzwZuJ57e8+tEAsTREemexFvS=jkw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FE1E175.4060005@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <CAEW+ogbckMN1VfkCUjLrSbD6GWeHR+1q7G55Rc2+oe+osJjb8g@mail.gmail.com> <4FE1E175.4060005@FreeBSD.org>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
Thank you.

I want to use vnet jail for a specific subnet that I need to seperate from
the system.
so basicly i create a vlan + a bridged interface to the public.
these two (vlan+bridged interface- epair0a) will in in the vnet jail, so I
can do NAT only for that vlan going out.
This is the idea, as there are more interfaces in the system and there is
only one interface out...

so basicly it should be a firewall & Nat only between the specific lan and
the outside world.

Can this be accomplished otherway?

Sami

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Alexander V. Chernikov <
melifaro@freebsd.org> wrote:

> On 19.06.2012 12:56, Sami Halabi wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I want to ask aout VNET jails, i read somehwre that I'm able to run IPFW,
>> but not PF firewall in a cnet jail.
>> is that correct?
>>
>> i want a vnet jail basicly for nat, so natd with ipfw + ipdivert is my
>>
> 1) You can do nat without vnet.
> 2) ipfw nat is currently the easiest way to do nat.
>
>
>  choice? or i can use pf somehow, I never used pf before,
>> so i would like some advise here...
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>>
>>
>
> --
> WBR, Alexander
>



-- 
Sami Halabi
Information Systems Engineer
NMS Projects Expert
FreeBSD SysAdmin Expert



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAEW+ogYegAzytOB8UOZzdxzwZuJ57e8+tEAsTREemexFvS=jkw>