can't route.
From: sam (samwun_at_hgcbroadband.com)
Date: 06/09/04
- Next message: Ed Hurst: "Re: Anyone try the X.org port?"
- Previous message: Steve O'Hara-Smith: "Re: is enabling hyperthreading on single xeon and freebsd 4.10 beneficial?"
- Next in thread: Ron Holloway: "Re: can't route."
- Reply: Ron Holloway: "Re: can't route."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 02:04:13 +0800
Hi,
I just setup some configuration for routing from the Freebsd to the
other subnet, but a test shown that a seperated host only can reach
(ping) the other interface of the FreeBSD but not the one beyond that.
Here is a diagram:
192.168.1.254 - 192.168.1.1 == 192.168.4.1 - 192.168.4.129
OpenBSD FreeBSD WinXP
where 192.168.1.254 (a OpenBSD) is an interface connected to another
interface as 192.168.1.1. .1.1 and .4.1 are belong to FreeBSD.
192.168.4.129 is a WindowXP.
Test result is the WinXP is only able to ping 192.168.1.1, but not able
to ping 192.168.1.254.
I have setup enable_route="YES" in file /etc/rc.conf and did a reboot.
Then I found the IP forward is assigned to 1:
root@fbsd [1:51am] [~]# sysctl -a | grep forward
kern.smp.forward_signal_enabled: 1
kern.smp.forward_roundrobin_enabled: 1
net.inet.ip.forwarding: 1
net.inet.ip.fastforwarding: 0
net.inet6.ip6.forwarding: 0
I think I need NAT to work, but PF is broken as I posted to the
newsgroup a while go. The NAT roule is:
# Macros: define common values, so they can be referenced and changed
easily.
ext_if="em0" # replace with actual external interface name i.e., dc0
int_if="fxp0" # replace with actual internal interface name i.e., dc1
#internal_net="10.1.1.1/8"
internal_net="192.168.4.1/24"
external_addr="192.168.1.1"
nat on $ext_if from $int_net to any -> ($ext_if)
rdr on $ext_if proto tcp \
from any to $ext_ip/32 port 25 -> 192.168.1.1 port 25
rdr on $ext_if proto tcp \
from any to $ext_ip/32 port 110 -> 192.168.1.1 port 110
rdr on $ext_if proto tcp \
from any to $ext_ip/32 port 53 -> 192.168.1.1 port 53
# Filtering: the implicit first two rules are
pass in all
pass out all
Ifconfig -a shown that :
root@fbsd [DING!] [...local/etc]# ifconfig -a
em0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
options=1b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING>
inet 192.168.1.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255
inet6 fe80::20e:cff:fe05:8229%em0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
ether 00:0e:0c:05:82:29
media: Ethernet autoselect (10baseT/UTP <half-duplex>)
status: active
fxp0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
options=b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU>
inet 192.168.4.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.4.255
inet6 fe80::202:b3ff:febb:a7a5%fxp0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2
ether 00:02:b3:bb:a7:a5
media: Ethernet autoselect (10baseT/UTP)
status: active
vr0: flags=8802<BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
ether 00:04:61:16:20:29
media: Ethernet autoselect (none)
status: no carrier
plip0: flags=8810<POINTOPOINT,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 16384
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000
inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128
inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x5
tap0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet6 fe80::2bd:a3ff:fe04:0%tap0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x6
inet 10.8.0.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.8.0.255
ether 00:bd:a3:04:00:00
Opened by PID 536
pflog0: flags=141<UP,RUNNING,PROMISC> mtu 33208
pfsync0: flags=41<UP,RUNNING> mtu 1896
netstat -rn shown that:
root@fbsd [2:00am] [...local/etc]# netstat -rn
Routing tables
Internet:
Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Netif Expire
default 192.168.1.254 UGS 0 420 em0
10.8/24 link#6 UC 0 0 tap0
127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 UH 0 0 lo0
192.168.1 link#1 UC 0 0 em0
192.168.1.129 00:09:6b:8d:b2:67 UHLW 0 216 em0 1030
192.168.1.254 00:02:b3:0b:3c:d1 UHLW 1 16 em0 1026
192.168.1.255 ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff UHLWb 0 15 em0
192.168.4 link#2 UC 0 0 fxp0
192.168.4.129 00:09:6b:8d:b2:67 UHLW 0 200 fxp0 183
192.168.4.255 ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff UHLWb 0 15 fxp0
What have I missed in order to route traffic to the other end of the
OpenBSD machine from WinXP?
If I need to fix the PF first, what is the work around for the PF issue?
thanks
sam
- Next message: Ed Hurst: "Re: Anyone try the X.org port?"
- Previous message: Steve O'Hara-Smith: "Re: is enabling hyperthreading on single xeon and freebsd 4.10 beneficial?"
- Next in thread: Ron Holloway: "Re: can't route."
- Reply: Ron Holloway: "Re: can't route."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
