Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #7016 > unrolled thread
| Started by | dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-01-15 10:07 -0800 |
| Last post | 2013-01-25 01:44 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 137 — 18 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-15 10:07 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-01-15 18:30 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-15 18:37 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-16 00:59 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-01-16 10:20 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-01-16 12:00 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-16 04:45 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-01-16 12:51 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-01-16 13:11 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-16 06:28 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-01-16 14:37 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-01-16 14:58 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-01-16 15:37 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-16 08:24 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-01-20 19:39 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-16 17:35 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-01-20 19:42 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2013-01-15 22:30 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-16 02:41 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2013-01-16 19:06 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-16 20:27 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-01-20 19:46 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Moe Trin <ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld.invalid> - 2013-01-20 22:07 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-21 05:31 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-21 00:17 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-21 17:33 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2013-01-21 21:15 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-01-21 21:56 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> - 2013-01-22 10:11 +1100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-21 23:42 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-01-22 00:09 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-22 00:33 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-22 02:53 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-22 19:05 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2013-01-22 21:16 +0200
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-22 23:53 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-01-23 10:28 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-23 03:28 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-23 17:26 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-23 13:02 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-23 22:12 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-24 05:12 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-24 17:09 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? cipher <cipher@nospamforme.org> - 2013-01-31 23:28 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-01 00:33 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? James Moe <jimoeDESPAM@sohnen-moe.com> - 2013-01-23 09:56 -0700
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-23 17:25 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2013-01-23 21:51 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-24 05:20 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-01-27 11:49 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-01-27 12:08 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? James Moe <jimoeDESPAM@sohnen-moe.com> - 2013-01-21 16:49 -0700
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-22 00:00 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? James Moe <jimoeDESPAM@sohnen-moe.com> - 2013-01-21 23:32 -0700
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-22 19:02 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-01-27 12:15 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? s_dubrovich@yahoo.com - 2013-01-22 09:08 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-22 19:07 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-01-22 19:38 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? s_dubrovich@yahoo.com - 2013-01-22 19:52 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-01-27 12:02 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? James Moe <jimoeDESPAM@sohnen-moe.com> - 2013-01-21 16:46 -0700
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-01-27 11:56 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-01-27 14:27 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-01-27 18:21 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-30 04:17 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-01-30 12:43 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-30 23:46 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-01-31 09:03 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-31 03:40 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-01-31 09:19 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-31 03:44 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-01-31 12:01 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-02-01 01:49 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-01-31 23:19 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-02-01 10:23 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-01 11:23 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-02-02 12:22 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-02 13:49 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Jean-David Beyer <jeandavid8@verizon.net> - 2013-02-02 10:13 -0500
[OT] Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-02-02 16:30 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2013-02-02 17:48 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-02 18:16 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-02-02 20:11 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2013-02-02 14:51 -0600
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-02-02 21:27 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-02 22:30 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-02-02 22:49 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-03 00:45 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? cipher <cipher@nospamforme.org> - 2013-02-03 00:52 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-03 11:01 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-02-03 13:15 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-03 13:20 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-02-03 15:08 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? cipher <cipher@nospamforme.org> - 2013-02-05 10:22 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-02-05 15:20 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-02-05 17:22 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-02-05 17:59 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-02-05 19:40 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2013-02-05 14:17 -0600
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-02-06 01:22 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-02-06 02:11 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-06 03:21 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-05 21:19 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-02-06 00:21 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2013-02-03 15:21 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2013-02-02 16:24 -0600
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-02-02 22:46 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2013-02-02 17:57 -0600
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2013-02-02 13:07 -0600
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-02-02 16:24 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-01 11:20 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-02-02 12:19 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-02 13:48 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-02-02 16:17 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-02 15:47 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-02-02 16:26 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> - 2013-02-04 03:19 -0800
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-02-04 17:03 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-04 19:51 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-02-06 01:14 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-02-06 09:07 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-06 13:58 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-02-07 01:09 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-07 00:58 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-02-09 13:46 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-02-09 15:07 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-02-09 17:06 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-02-09 17:19 +0000
ifconfig(8) vs. iproute Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> - 2013-02-09 17:18 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2013-02-10 04:44 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-02-10 14:14 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? cipher <cipher@nospamforme.org> - 2013-02-11 00:19 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-02-06 01:09 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? cipher <cipher@nospamforme.org> - 2013-02-04 21:46 +0000
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-02-02 17:30 +0100
Re: Using a public IP-address in my home private network? Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2013-01-25 01:44 +0100
Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-16 20:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <z2EJs.124778$2v.704@newsfe05.iad> |
| In reply to | #7040 |
On 2013-01-16, Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote: > On 2013-01-16, unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote: >> On 2013-01-15, Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote: >>> On 2013-01-15, dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> wrote: > > [...] > >>>> The outside interface of the router has IP-address 20.20.20.20. >>> >>> In that case you are working for for Computer Sciences Corporation in >>> Virginia or Louisiana and really should be asking your IT department for >>> help. Or not be doing whatever it is you're trying to do. >> >> Now now. 20.20.20.20 is clearly a fake. >> >> At least a smiley would have been appropriate in your post. > > It's a real IP number, allocated as follows: Of course it is a real IP number. However, the poster clearly did NOT intend you to assume that that was the real IP number he intended to use, but rather was a fake number (in the real routable IP address range) to illustrate what he wanted to do. If you were trying to imply that he should not simply grab some public number if he has not arranged for the owner to use that number, you are correct. Not only is that irrespnsible, but almost certainly will not work, since the world will not know how to route packets to him. So not only is it irresponsible, it is also pointless since it will not work. But we have no idea whether he has permission to use that publick IP or not. And the one he plans to use is almost certainly not 20.20.20.20.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pascal Hambourg <boite-a-spam@plouf.fr.eu.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-20 19:46 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <kdhe1k$1jg7$3@saria.nerim.net> |
| In reply to | #7023 |
unruh a écrit : > > Now now. 20.20.20.20 is clearly a fake. Why doesn't anyone ever use the 192.0.2.0/24 range which is reserved for exemples and documentation ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Moe Trin <ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-20 22:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnkfoqln.adg.ibuprofin@fermi.phx.az.us> |
| In reply to | #7048 |
On Sun, 20 Jan 2013, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.misc, in article
<kdhe1k$1jg7$3@saria.nerim.net>, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
> unruh a écrit :
>> Now now. 20.20.20.20 is clearly a fake.
>Why doesn't anyone ever use the 192.0.2.0/24 range which is reserved
>for exemples and documentation ?
Because most people are totally unaware of the fact that there _are_ a
number of ranges used for documentation. See
3849 IPv6 Address Prefix Reserved for Documentation. G. Huston, A.
Lord, P. Smith. July 2004. (Format: TXT=7872 bytes) (Status:
INFORMATIONAL)
5737 IPv4 Address Blocks Reserved for Documentation. J. Arkko, M.
Cotton, L. Vegoda. January 2010. (Format: TXT=7036 bytes)
(Updates RFC1166) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)
6676 Multicast Addresses for Documentation. S. Venaas, R. Parekh, G.
Van de Velde, T. Chown, M. Eubanks. August 2012. (Format:
TXT=14100 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)
and for other special uses
5156 Special-Use IPv6 Addresses. M. Blanchet. April 2008. (Format:
TXT=11931 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)
5735 Special Use IPv4 Addresses. M. Cotton, L. Vegoda. January 2010.
(Format: TXT=20369 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC3330) (Updated by
RFC6598) (Also BCP0153) (Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)
all available at your friendly source of RFCs, such as search.ietf.org
or www.rfc-editor.org
Old guy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-21 05:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hp4Ls.133203$2x2.105290@newsfe01.iad> |
| In reply to | #7049 |
On 2013-01-20, Moe Trin <ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld.invalid> wrote: > On Sun, 20 Jan 2013, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.misc, in article ><kdhe1k$1jg7$3@saria.nerim.net>, Pascal Hambourg wrote: > >> unruh a ??crit : > >>> Now now. 20.20.20.20 is clearly a fake. > >>Why doesn't anyone ever use the 192.0.2.0/24 range which is reserved >>for exemples and documentation ? > > Because most people are totally unaware of the fact that there _are_ a > number of ranges used for documentation. See Except that in this case the OT clearly wanted to use a genuine, public address, not a private address, but also did not want to tell us the public address he really wants to use. (Using some other poor sucker's IP address is clearly far better than using his own)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-21 00:17 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <df2d1728-1622-42c0-bc81-fa42338e02f1@4g2000yqv.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #7050 |
> Except that in this case the OT clearly wanted to use a genuine, public > address, not a private address, but also did not want to tell us the > public address he really wants to use. (Using some other poor sucker's > IP address is clearly far better than using his own) This is not an hw-assignment. I don't know the what specific IP-addresses will be used (it's not really important which specific IP-address), other than computer2 should have an external IP-address and be connected to a switch, and then the switch connected to a router. Computer1 should have one(or possibly more) internal/private IP-address(es), as described in the original post. Computer2 should be directly accessible from the internet, no NAT should be used in the router. The router can be manually configured with routes. The problems I see is that traffic between computer1 and computer2 will not work because ARP will not be able to resolve MAC-addresses between the two, since they are on different subnets. A solution could be to manually add the MAC-address of computer2's IP- address to both computer1 and the router? Also, the router might have problems ARP-ing for computer2's IP- address since on different subnet. A solution could be to manually add computer1's and the router's MAC addresses to computer2? Or are there better solutions for this, for example by adding a private IP-address to computer2 as well on the same interface as the public IP-address? Then no manual ARP-configuration would be needed in any of the computers of router, the only thing is that computer2 would have to be configured to forward packets between its internal and external IP-address/subnet.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-21 17:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <xZeLs.73705$fh5.14610@newsfe26.iad> |
| In reply to | #7051 |
On 2013-01-21, dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> Except that in this case the OT clearly wanted to use a genuine, public >> address, not a private address, but also did not want to tell us the >> public address he really wants to use. (Using some other poor sucker's >> IP address is clearly far better than using his own) > > This is not an hw-assignment. > > I don't know the what specific IP-addresses will be used (it's not > really important which specific IP-address), other than computer2 > should have an external IP-address and be connected to a switch, and > then the switch connected to a router. Computer1 should have one(or > possibly more) internal/private IP-address(es), as described in the > original post. > > Computer2 should be directly accessible from the internet, no NAT > should be used in the router. The router can be manually configured > with routes. So it must be on some network which can physically resolve that IP to a MAC. Note that another way of doing it would be for the router to be set up to forward all queries to its own public IP address to that machine (computer 2). That is how I work it. > > The problems I see is that traffic between computer1 and computer2 > will not work because ARP will not be able to resolve MAC-addresses > between the two, since they are on different subnets. > A solution could be to manually add the MAC-address of computer2's IP- > address to both computer1 and the router? > > Also, the router might have problems ARP-ing for computer2's IP- > address since on different subnet. > A solution could be to manually add computer1's and the router's MAC > addresses to computer2? > > Or are there better solutions for this, for example by adding a > private IP-address to computer2 as well on the same interface as the > public IP-address? Then no manual ARP-configuration would be needed in > any of the computers of router, the only thing is that computer2 would > have to be configured to forward packets between its internal and > external IP-address/subnet. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-21 21:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnkfrbv5.8gj.catwheezel@ID-107770.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #7051 |
On 2013-01-21, dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> Except that in this case the OT clearly wanted to use a genuine, public >> address, not a private address, but also did not want to tell us the >> public address he really wants to use. (Using some other poor sucker's >> IP address is clearly far better than using his own) > > This is not an hw-assignment. > > I don't know the what specific IP-addresses will be used (it's not > really important which specific IP-address), other than computer2 > should have an external IP-address and be connected to a switch, and > then the switch connected to a router. Computer1 should have one(or > possibly more) internal/private IP-address(es), as described in the > original post. > > Computer2 should be directly accessible from the internet, no NAT > should be used in the router. The router can be manually configured > with routes. If you have a router that can handle two WAN (internet) IP numbers and keep them separate. I think it would be easier to have two internet connections, each with its own WAN IP - and no router or switch connected to either of them, unless you want to share one of those connections between two or more computers on your own local network (LAN). > The problems I see is that traffic between computer1 and computer2 > will not work because ARP will not be able to resolve MAC-addresses > between the two, since they are on different subnets. > A solution could be to manually add the MAC-address of computer2's IP- > address to both computer1 and the router? > > Also, the router might have problems ARP-ing for computer2's IP- > address since on different subnet. > A solution could be to manually add computer1's and the router's MAC > addresses to computer2? > > Or are there better solutions for this, for example by adding a > private IP-address to computer2 as well on the same interface as the > public IP-address? Then no manual ARP-configuration would be needed in > any of the computers of router, the only thing is that computer2 would > have to be configured to forward packets between its internal and > external IP-address/subnet. If you want to have a computer connected to two networks (eg the WAN and your own LAN), it will need two network interface cards (NICs) - Wifi or Ethernet. In effect, the computer becomes its own router. But you haven't explained what you're trying to achieve or why you think it necessary to have two WAN IPs or what your objection is to NAT. If we knew that it would be easier to offer advice. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-21 21:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnkfrebm.vh4.BitTwister@wb.home.test> |
| In reply to | #7053 |
On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 21:15:17 +0000, Whiskers wrote: > But you haven't explained what you're trying to achieve or why you think it > necessary to have two WAN IPs or what your objection is to NAT. If we > knew that it would be easier to offer advice. Keep in mind, one of the original requirements was to have any public ip address not supplied by his ISP to route to his router without buying a second ip address.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Grant <omg@grrr.id.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-22 10:11 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <giirf8lums6i0h19qa4rj0llvrr2a2j9p2@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #7054 |
On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 21:56:06 +0000 (UTC), Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> wrote: >On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 21:15:17 +0000, Whiskers wrote: > >> But you haven't explained what you're trying to achieve or why you think it >> necessary to have two WAN IPs or what your objection is to NAT. If we >> knew that it would be easier to offer advice. > >Keep in mind, one of the original requirements was to have any public >ip address not supplied by his ISP to route to his router without >buying a second ip address. > Cannot be done, how is the 'Internet' going to route that spurious IP address? What can be done is to run, for example, virtual web servers that respond to different domain names on the same IP, perhaps that is OP's desire? I have registered several domain names and they all resolve to the same IP number supplied by my ISP. First hop from a single IP is the ISP, cannot be another way AFAIK. Grant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-21 23:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <BnkLs.15030$O02.12618@newsfe18.iad> |
| In reply to | #7054 |
On 2013-01-21, Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> wrote: > On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 21:15:17 +0000, Whiskers wrote: > >> But you haven't explained what you're trying to achieve or why you think it >> necessary to have two WAN IPs or what your objection is to NAT. If we >> knew that it would be easier to offer advice. > > Keep in mind, one of the original requirements was to have any public > ip address not supplied by his ISP to route to his router without > buying a second ip address. Lets be fair. He did not state that, but some of us wondered if that was the case. That is impossible, and will also get you disconnected from the net by his ISP. If we are charitable, then he is on a network and has received a public IP address from his ISP for Computer2 (C2). He also has a router which connects a private address network together (say 10.x.y.z) That router presumably also has a public IP address on his ISP's network. How can he get C2 to be able to talk to C1 which is on the private network? IF this is the question, then there are at least 2 possibilities. a) put two network cards into C2, one of which has the public address, and the other has and address on the private network. Set up the routing tables on C2 so that any packets for the rest of the world go out through the first interface, and any for the private (10.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0) go out the other. b) Set the router to have the public IP address, but install it so that any packets that come to the ports he wants open to go directly to the private IP of C2. (port forwarding). I assume he wants only a few ports forwarded (eg ssh, httpd, ftp,) This will require only one public IP address (for the router). This works fine-- I do this on my home network so I can get in from work. In this case because the "router" is via a cable network with dynamic IP address, I send a packet every 5 min to the work machine so it knows what the surrent IP address of the machine is, and installs that address into appropriate places ( /etc/hosts, /etc/postfix/transport,...) What will NOT work is for him to assign himself some public IP address and expect it to work (since noone in the world will know how to get to his home network). > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-22 00:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnkfrm50.m0f.BitTwister@wb.home.test> |
| In reply to | #7056 |
On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 23:42:25 GMT, unruh wrote: > On 2013-01-21, Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> wrote: >> >> Keep in mind, one of the original requirements was to have any public >> ip address not supplied by his ISP to route to his router without >> buying a second ip address. > > Lets be fair. I am being fair. > He did not state that, but some of us wondered if that was the case. IIRC I mentioned he would have to buy another ip and he replied back he did not want to buy second ip.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-22 00:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j7lLs.86680$tG.38018@newsfe15.iad> |
| In reply to | #7060 |
On 2013-01-22, Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> wrote: > On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 23:42:25 GMT, unruh wrote: >> On 2013-01-21, Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> wrote: >>> >>> Keep in mind, one of the original requirements was to have any public >>> ip address not supplied by his ISP to route to his router without >>> buying a second ip address. >> >> Lets be fair. > > I am being fair. > >> He did not state that, but some of us wondered if that was the case. > > IIRC I mentioned he would have to buy another ip and he replied > back he did not want to buy second ip. > Then port forwarding is the only way.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-22 02:53 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3cc7fd7e-c4bd-4c0b-a0e4-f2048305740f@m12g2000yqp.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #7056 |
> > Lets be fair. He did not state that, but some of us wondered if that was > the case. That is impossible, and will also get you disconnected from > the net by his ISP. > > If we are charitable, then he is on a network and has received a public IP > address from his ISP for Computer2 (C2). He also has a router which connects a private > address network together (say 10.x.y.z) That router presumably also has > a public IP address on his ISP's network. How can he get C2 to be able > to talk to C1 which is on the private network? IF this is the question, > then there are at least 2 possibilities. Yes, this is the question. > a) put two network cards into C2, one of which has the public address, > and the other has and address on the private network. Set up the routing > tables on C2 so that any packets for the rest of the world go out > through the first interface, and any for the private (10.0.0.0 netmask > 255.0.0.0) go out the other. I guess two network cards is not really needed, one network card can have two IP-addresses (alias), both the private and public IP-address. Both IP-addresses will then have the same MAC-address. # ip addr add 30.30.30.30/24 brd + dev eth0 # ip addr add 10.10.10.11/24 brd + dev eth0 or similar using ifconfig: # ifconfig eth0 30.30.30.30 netmask 255.255.255.0 # ifconfig eth0:0 10.10.10.11 netmask 255.255.255.0 Or will this cause some problem since both the private and public IP- address will have the same MAC-address?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-22 19:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <QpBLs.42724$9N1.21846@newsfe13.iad> |
| In reply to | #7063 |
On 2013-01-22, dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> Lets be fair. He did not state that, but some of us wondered if that was >> the case. That is impossible, and will also get you disconnected from >> the net by his ISP. >> >> If we are charitable, then he is on a network and has received a public IP >> address from his ISP for Computer2 (C2). He also has a router which connects a private >> address network together (say 10.x.y.z) That router presumably also has >> a public IP address on his ISP's network. How can he get C2 to be able >> to talk to C1 which is on the private network? IF this is the question, >> then there are at least 2 possibilities. > > Yes, this is the question. > >> a) put two network cards into C2, one of which has the public address, >> and the other has and address on the private network. Set up the routing >> tables on C2 so that any packets for the rest of the world go out >> through the first interface, and any for the private (10.0.0.0 netmask >> 255.0.0.0) go out the other. > > I guess two network cards is not really needed, one network card can > have two IP-addresses (alias), both the private and public IP-address. > Both IP-addresses will then have the same MAC-address. > > # ip addr add 30.30.30.30/24 brd + dev eth0 > # ip addr add 10.10.10.11/24 brd + dev eth0 > > or similar using ifconfig: > > # ifconfig eth0 30.30.30.30 netmask 255.255.255.0 > # ifconfig eth0:0 10.10.10.11 netmask 255.255.255.0 > > Or will this cause some problem since both the private and public IP- > address will have the same MAC-address? Never tried this so I do not know, but that public address MUST be assigned by your ISP, who can then put it into his MAC tables. We have no idea how the OP is connected to his ISP. modem? dhcp? University lan, company lan,....? > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-22 21:16 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <kdmoj9$1f0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #7067 |
On 22.1.13 9:05 , unruh wrote: > On 2013-01-22, dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Lets be fair. He did not state that, but some of us wondered if that was >>> the case. That is impossible, and will also get you disconnected from >>> the net by his ISP. >>> >>> If we are charitable, then he is on a network and has received a public IP >>> address from his ISP for Computer2 (C2). He also has a router which connects a private >>> address network together (say 10.x.y.z) That router presumably also has >>> a public IP address on his ISP's network. How can he get C2 to be able >>> to talk to C1 which is on the private network? IF this is the question, >>> then there are at least 2 possibilities. >> >> Yes, this is the question. >> >>> a) put two network cards into C2, one of which has the public address, >>> and the other has and address on the private network. Set up the routing >>> tables on C2 so that any packets for the rest of the world go out >>> through the first interface, and any for the private (10.0.0.0 netmask >>> 255.0.0.0) go out the other. >> >> I guess two network cards is not really needed, one network card can >> have two IP-addresses (alias), both the private and public IP-address. >> Both IP-addresses will then have the same MAC-address. >> >> # ip addr add 30.30.30.30/24 brd + dev eth0 >> # ip addr add 10.10.10.11/24 brd + dev eth0 >> >> or similar using ifconfig: >> >> # ifconfig eth0 30.30.30.30 netmask 255.255.255.0 >> # ifconfig eth0:0 10.10.10.11 netmask 255.255.255.0 >> >> Or will this cause some problem since both the private and public IP- >> address will have the same MAC-address? > > Never tried this so I do not know, but that public address MUST be > assigned by your ISP, who can then put it into his MAC tables. > We have no idea how the OP is connected to his ISP. modem? dhcp? > University lan, company lan,....? > It does not matter: As long as the next hop upstream does not know to route the IP to the OP, the game is lost. -- Tauno Voipio
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-22 23:53 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <97f0f0f1-3084-485e-9e62-3a93202d607b@x3g2000yqo.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #7067 |
On 22 Jan, 20:05, unruh <un...@invalid.ca> wrote:
> On 2013-01-22,dspfun<dsp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Lets be fair. He did not state that, but some of us wondered if that was
> >> the case. That is impossible, and will also get you disconnected from
> >> the net by his ISP.
>
> >> If we are charitable, then he is on a network and has received a public IP
> >> address from his ISP for Computer2 (C2). He also has a router which connects a private
> >> address network together (say 10.x.y.z) That router presumably also has
> >> a public IP address on his ISP's network. How can he get C2 to be able
> >> to talk to C1 which is on the private network? IF this is the question,
> >> then there are at least 2 possibilities.
>
> > Yes, this is the question.
>
> >> a) put two network cards into C2, one of which has the public address,
> >> and the other has and address on the private network. Set up the routing
> >> tables on C2 so that any packets for the rest of the world go out
> >> through the first interface, and any for the private (10.0.0.0 netmask
> >> 255.0.0.0) go out the other.
>
> > I guess two network cards is not really needed, one network card can
> > have two IP-addresses (alias), both the private and public IP-address.
> > Both IP-addresses will then have the same MAC-address.
>
> > # ip addr add 30.30.30.30/24 brd + dev eth0
> > # ip addr add 10.10.10.11/24 brd + dev eth0
>
> > or similar using ifconfig:
>
> > # ifconfig eth0 30.30.30.30 netmask 255.255.255.0
> > # ifconfig eth0:0 10.10.10.11 netmask 255.255.255.0
>
> > Or will this cause some problem since both the private and public IP-
> > address will have the same MAC-address?
>
> Never tried this so I do not know, but that public address MUST be
> assigned by your ISP, who can then put it into his MAC tables.
> We have no idea how the OP is connected to his ISP. modem? dhcp?
> University lan, company lan,....?
>
>
The home-router is connected to the ISP router via DHCP. And the ISP
knows how to route to the public IP-address of compter2.
In my original post I tried to simplify what I want to achieve. But
what I am trying to setup is the same network as in the original post,
but all traffic (incoming and outgoing) should go via computer1 which
has the internal IP-address. Computer1 could then potentially become a
bottleneck, but it will have enough capacity.
Both computer1 and computer2 are linux machines.
So the question is really how to setup a network like this. I don't
want to use more than one public IP-addresses for computer2 and one
public IP-address on the outside of my home-router which connects to
the ISP-router. Computer2/home-router should not be using NAT.
To get this network setup working more private addresses can be used.
Is the following a feasible network setup (I have changed the IP-
numbering from the original post to possibly make it clearer)?
C2 will have one NIC with two IP-addresses which have the same MAC
(i.e. IP-alias), 50.50.50.51 and 192.168.1.3.
In the incoming direction:
The home-router will be configured with a next hop of 192.168.1.2 (C1)
for packets destined to 50.50.50.51.
C1 will be configured with a next hop of 192.168.1.3 (C2) for packets
destined to 50.50.50.51.
Then C2 will be configured to forward packets to 50.50.50.51 when it
receives packets on its interface with 192.168.1.3.
In the outgoing direction:
C2 will be configured with a default gateway of 192.168.1.2 (C1), and
be configured to put source address 50.50.50.51 in its packets.
C1 will be configured with a default gateway of 192.168.1.1.
Home-router will be configured with a default gateway of the ISP-
router.
Resulting in a network setup like this:
C2
C1 192.168.1.3
192.168.1.2 50.50.50.51
| |
-----------------------
| switch |
-----------------------
|
192.168.1.1
Home-router
50.50.50.50
|
ISP-router
Is this the easiest/best/most standard way of setting up the network,
given that NAT should not be used for C2?
This way all traffic will go via C1, which is what I am trying to
achieve.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-23 10:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <877gn42nx5.fsf@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #7072 |
dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> writes: > This way all traffic will go via C1, which is what I am trying to > achieve. Why? Having the router route 50.50.50.51 straight to C2 would be more efficient. -- http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-23 03:28 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3fc9aaef-518c-472d-909d-2d8a7db95112@w8g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #7073 |
On 23 Jan, 11:28, Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote: > dspfun<dsp...@hotmail.com> writes: > > This way all traffic will go via C1, which is what I am trying to > > achieve. > > Why? Having the router route 50.50.50.51 straight to C2 would be more > efficient. > A reason could be to run/implement some software application on C1 for prioritization based on payload content, i.e. packet inspection.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-23 17:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <x3VLs.63461$411.43043@newsfe02.iad> |
| In reply to | #7074 |
On 2013-01-23, dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> wrote: > On 23 Jan, 11:28, Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote: >> dspfun<dsp...@hotmail.com> writes: >> > This way all traffic will go via C1, which is what I am trying to >> > achieve. >> >> Why? ?Having the router route 50.50.50.51 straight to C2 would be more >> efficient. >> > > A reason could be to run/implement some software application on C1 for > prioritization based on payload content, i.e. packet inspection. Which all slows everything down. The slow part of the network has already occured. His internal network can be Gb. The computer to isp is going to a few Mb.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dspfun <dspfun@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-23 13:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6c2bc0fb-a1aa-4f04-aceb-91aad4bfc8ec@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #7082 |
> >> dspfun<dsp...@hotmail.com> writes: > > >> > This way all traffic will go via C1, which is what I am trying to > > >> > achieve. > > >> > > >> Why? ?Having the router route 50.50.50.51 straight to C2 would be more > > >> efficient. > > >> > > > > > > A reason could be to run/implement some software application on C1 for > > > prioritization based on payload content, i.e. packet inspection. > > > > Which all slows everything down. The slow part of the network has already > > occured. His internal network can be Gb. The computer to isp is going to > > a few Mb. Yes, I agree. The purpose of this setup however is to implement/run/verify some packet inspection software on C1 which prioritize packets based on payload content. The purpose is not to try to get higher throughput to C2.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web