Re: problem with routnig
- From: Marko Lerota <marko.lerota@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 16:08:03 +0200
"Bruce M. Simpson" <bms@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Marko Lerota wrote:
route_lan2="-net 192.168.2.0 -netmask 255.255.255.0 -iface xl0"Neither of these subnet routes should be necessary as 192.168.2.0/24
route_lan2="-net 192.168.2.0 -netmask 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.1"
is already directly connected via fxp0.
Do you still see the problem without this route installed?
Yes
I'm trying to do this
FreeBSD BOX
LAN 192.168.2.0/24 ---> switch0 ---> fxp0 192.168.2.71
xl0 192.168.1.70 ---> switch1 ---> GW 192.168.1.1
I want to intercept every packet from network, and don't allow LAN users
to go directly to gateway. Gateway is phisically removed from LAN users.
The only link is through FreeBSD box. Maybe this is, how they call it
"transparent proxy or Intercepting proxy" ?
--
One cannot sell the earth upon which the people walk
Tacunka Witco
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: problem with routnig
- From: Joost Bekkers
- Re: problem with routnig
- References:
- problem with routnig
- From: Marko Lerota
- Re: problem with routnig
- From: Bruce M. Simpson
- problem with routnig
- Prev by Date: Re: problem with routnig
- Next by Date: Re: problem with routnig
- Previous by thread: Re: problem with routnig
- Next by thread: Re: problem with routnig
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
