sslug-teknik team mailing list archive

["Admir Trakic" <admir@xxxxxxxxx>]

Please repplly in danish if convinient!

Yes,I was rather implying to have 2 netcards on the Linux machine:
-eth0=192.168.1.3 to connect me to NAT router (192.168.1.1)
-eth1=? ? ? ?  to use as gateway to my existing win clint.

Hmmm, about NAT firwall:yes it is true, but I prefer when I can read some
log files(if you know hat I mean)

/admir


-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Bendtsen [mailto:bendtsen@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 29. januar 2001 21:21
To: sslug-teknik@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [TEKNIK] NAT routing question



it's not completely clear what you want.
Do you want 2 netcards in the linux server ??
With that ip, the router from teledk already acts as a minor firewall.


ion++


A picture allways lies...


On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Admir Trakic wrote:

> Please repply in danish if better!
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a Tele.dk NAT connection with preconfigurated router(192.168.1.1)
> with DHCP scope:
> (192.168.1.6 - . . . 244)
> Now, as I was feeling quite unsecure placing my win only client directly
on
> Internet via router's hub (;-)),
> so I just bought a new netcard for my Linux web server in order to enable
> routing, and perhaps some kind
> of minor firewalling(later). My existing web server's configuration is:
> (netcard eth0: ifconfig 192.168.1.3 broadcast 192.168.1.255 netmask
> 255.255.255.0)
>
> What I'm asking here is advise for:
>
> 1) IP adress for the second netcard eth1 on my LAN(enabling gateway for
WIN
> clint)
> and also using existing router (192.168.1.1)
> 2) According to my SuSe manual it say's that hosts behind the gateway
shall
> use broadcast
> 255.255.255.255. So to exclude any doubt please recommend me whole win
> clients IP configuration.
>
> To be more precise with this question I have, ilustration follows:
>
> internet-->(router 192.168.1.1)-->(linux box as webserver eth0=192.168.1.3
|
> router ????? )
> 								               |
> 								               -->(win client ???)
>
> PS. I have seen routing explanation on the current SSLUG Linux book, but I
> think my network is a bit different, so
> that's why I'm bodering you with this question ;-)
> Again, If you find this network configuration wrong, I'm also interessted
in
> looking at
> your idea of routing network design with NAT.
>
> Thank you!
>
> --
> best regards
>
> Admir Trakic
> linux cheerleader since 1997
>
>