gateway setup
in [Linux Networking]
|
Prev: ntp problems
Next: TSO in TCPv4
From: David Schwartz on 22 Apr 2010 21:35 On Apr 22, 6:15 pm, Joshua Whalen <joshuafwha...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > The westell/verizon router is configured with a dhcp-assigned address on > the telco side, a static ip address of 192.168.1.1 on the user side. I'm > doing it this way so that I can share out the connection with about 2 > dozen users without overloading the crappy little soho router (linksys) > that was in use before. Since the router still has to NAT every single connection, how are you avoiding overloading the crappy little soho router? > I should mention, that with the dsl router config'd as current, my apple > airport extreme (b/g model) has no trouble resolving addresses or > forwarding SIP packets. My phone is working great! It's just working > only for me. The airport is configured to distribute a range of > addresses via dhcp, and has nat disabled. I'd be happy with a similar > config on the linux box. are you saying this can't be done? Why not? I > would think a full-blown unix os would eat my little airport for > breakfast on this task. The problem is not the capacity of the gateway, it's the configuration of the network. As I said, you have two problems: 1) How does the crappy little SOHO router know where to send packets bound for the other local subnets? 2) How does the crappy little SOHO router know it needs to NAT packets to/from the other local subnets? (And it does -- if they exit your network with 192.168.x.y source address, packets will never get back to you.) Turn the crappy SOHO router into a bridge. Let the Linux box do all the routing. Otherwise, you'll wind up with double NAT. DS
From: Mart Frauenlob on 23 Apr 2010 03:01 On 23.04.2010 03:15, Joshua Whalen wrote: > The westell/verizon router is configured with a dhcp-assigned address on > the telco side, a static ip address of 192.168.1.1 on the user side. I'm > doing it this way so that I can share out the connection with about 2 > dozen users without overloading the crappy little soho router (linksys) > that was in use before. Can't you just query the necessary login data from your ISP and remove the westell/verizon router? Let your linux box do the work. What's the need for 2 routers?
From: klaus zerwes on 23 Apr 2010 03:35 On 04/23/2010 03:23 AM, Joshua Whalen wrote: > In article<hqq4p5$e5s$03$1(a)news.t-online.com>, > klaus zerwes<kzerwes(a)web.de> wrote: [...] >> If I understand that clearly: >> >> WAN - router - gateway<- 3 other NICs 192.168.[2-4].1/24 >> >> In short: the router needs to nou the routes too! >> route to 192.168.[2-4].0/24 via gw 192.168.1.2 [...] >> Hope this helps. >> >> Klaus > > Hmmmm.... Makes sense. Let me see if that works. Thanks so much for the > help, this sounds like it will solve the problem. > > Joshua It may - but as always: YMMW as I can only guess your setup. And as others already have mentioned: It may be useless to use to routers (OK - some scenarios may legitimate this, but it should be avoided if possible) Good luck Klaus -- Klaus Zerwes http://www.zero-sys.net
From: Joshua Whalen on 25 Apr 2010 23:49 Thanks to everyone so far for all your help... I'm pretty close to havng a workable solution, but can someone clue me in on exactly how one might initiate a pppoe connection WITHOUT the router? I kind of had a sudden flash of memory where I recalled having made such a setup about a decade ago, where I simply plugged the dsl line into the ethernet jack. This, however, was on a mac, not a linux box, and so I was using chimpinterface tools like internet connect to establish the internet connection. It seemed that David was implying I could do something like this with linux, but I want to make sure I've understood this correctly, and what software, if any, I need to do the job. Again, I'm running Debian/Lenny with a Verizon dsl line (soon to be a panix/verizon dsl line, which will make life easier). Thanks again to everyone, both for your input and your patience!! Joshua In article <hqrikd$a9d$03$1(a)news.t-online.com>, klaus zerwes <kzerwes(a)web.de> wrote: > On 04/23/2010 03:23 AM, Joshua Whalen wrote: > > In article<hqq4p5$e5s$03$1(a)news.t-online.com>, > > klaus zerwes<kzerwes(a)web.de> wrote: > [...] > >> If I understand that clearly: > >> > >> WAN - router - gateway<- 3 other NICs 192.168.[2-4].1/24 > >> > >> In short: the router needs to nou the routes too! > >> route to 192.168.[2-4].0/24 via gw 192.168.1.2 > [...] > >> Hope this helps. > >> > >> Klaus > > > > Hmmmm.... Makes sense. Let me see if that works. Thanks so much for the > > help, this sounds like it will solve the problem. > > > > Joshua > > It may - but as always: YMMW as I can only guess your setup. > > And as others already have mentioned: It may be useless to use to > routers (OK - some scenarios may legitimate this, but it should be > avoided if possible) > > Good luck > Klaus -- Your processes can run, but they can't hide.
From: goarilla on 26 Apr 2010 04:10
Joshua Whalen wrote: > Thanks to everyone so far for all your help... I'm pretty close to havng > a workable solution, but can someone clue me in on exactly how one might > initiate a pppoe connection WITHOUT the router? I kind of had a sudden > flash of memory where I recalled having made such a setup about a decade > ago, where I simply plugged the dsl line into the ethernet jack. This, > however, was on a mac, not a linux box, and so I was using > chimpinterface tools like internet connect to establish the internet > connection. It seemed that David was implying I could do something like > this with linux, but I want to make sure I've understood this correctly, > and what software, if any, I need to do the job. Again, I'm running > Debian/Lenny with a Verizon dsl line (soon to be a panix/verizon dsl > line, which will make life easier). > > Thanks again to everyone, both for your input and your patience!! > > Joshua > how about this one: http://www.roaringpenguin.com/products/pppoe#download |