[gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Grant]

I have a Gentoo router with eth0 connected to the WAN (DSL modem/router) and
ath0 connected to the LAN.  It works perfectly.

I've added two ethernet cards and I'm trying to connect from another machine
to one of the new cards (eth1 and eth2).  ifconfig shows the cards are
detected just fine, but dhcp always fails when trying to obtain an IP address.
I have the following /etc/conf.d/net:

config_eth0="192.168.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0"
routes_eth0="default via 192.168.1.1"

config_ath0="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
mode_ath0="master"
essid_ath0="mynetwork"

config_eth1="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"

config_eth2="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"

and the following in /etc/dnsmasq.conf:

interface=ath0
interface=eth1
interface=eth2

I've started net.eth1 and net.eth2 (both are links to net.lo) and restarted
dnsmasq.  I thought it might be a problem with my iptables settings which
don't take the new interfaces into account, but stopping iptables doesn't seem
to help.

Can anyone help me out?

- Grant
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Oliver M A Wilson]

On 21:19 Wed 27 Sep     , Grant wrote:
> I have a Gentoo router with eth0 connected to the WAN (DSL modem/router) and
> ath0 connected to the LAN.  It works perfectly.
> 
> I've added two ethernet cards and I'm trying to connect from another machine
> to one of the new cards (eth1 and eth2).  ifconfig shows the cards are
> detected just fine, but dhcp always fails when trying to obtain an IP 
> address.
> I have the following /etc/conf.d/net:
> 
> config_eth0="192.168.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> routes_eth0="default via 192.168.1.1"
> 
> config_ath0="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> mode_ath0="master"
> essid_ath0="mynetwork"
> 
> config_eth1="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> 
> config_eth2="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> 
> and the following in /etc/dnsmasq.conf:
> 
> interface=ath0
> interface=eth1
> interface=eth2
> 
> I've started net.eth1 and net.eth2 (both are links to net.lo) and restarted
> dnsmasq.  I thought it might be a problem with my iptables settings which
> don't take the new interfaces into account, but stopping iptables doesn't 
> seem
> to help.
> 
> Can anyone help me out?
> 
> - Grant
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Grant,
    Can you ping the server? Set up the interface manually and then try.
Also, is the dhcp client connected directly to one of the interfaces on the
dhcp server? If that is the case you will need a cross over cable to do it
as opposed to a normal patch cable.
    Regards,
        Oliver Wilson


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Grant]

> > I have a Gentoo router with eth0 connected to the WAN (DSL modem/router) and
> > ath0 connected to the LAN.  It works perfectly.
> >
> > I've added two ethernet cards and I'm trying to connect from another machine
> > to one of the new cards (eth1 and eth2).  ifconfig shows the cards are
> > detected just fine, but dhcp always fails when trying to obtain an IP
> > address.
> > I have the following /etc/conf.d/net:
> >
> > config_eth0="192.168.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> > routes_eth0="default via 192.168.1.1"
> >
> > config_ath0="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> > mode_ath0="master"
> > essid_ath0="mynetwork"
> >
> > config_eth1="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> >
> > config_eth2="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> >
> > and the following in /etc/dnsmasq.conf:
> >
> > interface=ath0
> > interface=eth1
> > interface=eth2
> >
> > I've started net.eth1 and net.eth2 (both are links to net.lo) and restarted
> > dnsmasq.  I thought it might be a problem with my iptables settings which
> > don't take the new interfaces into account, but stopping iptables doesn't
> > seem
> > to help.
> >
> > Can anyone help me out?
> >
> > - Grant
> > --
> > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
> Grant,
>     Can you ping the server? Set up the interface manually and then try.
> Also, is the dhcp client connected directly to one of the interfaces on the
> dhcp server? If that is the case you will need a cross over cable to do it
> as opposed to a normal patch cable.

Ah, crossovers cables.  I guess I need to whip one of those up.  Do
you think I can get away with just a box cutter when converting a
patch cable if I'm careful?

Do the rest of my settings above look OK?

- Grant
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 595 bytes --]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 07:12:47 -0700, Grant wrote:

> > > config_eth0="192.168.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> > > config_ath0="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask
> > > config_eth1="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask
> > > config_eth2="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask
> 
> Do the rest of my settings above look OK?

Three of your interfaces have the same IP address. If you want to use
DHCP for them, they should be

config_eth1=( "dhcp" )
config_eth2=( "dhcp" )


-- 
Neil Bothwick

We are Drunk of Borg. Resilience is floor tile. Wan'be sim'lated?

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Oliver M A Wilson]

On 07:12 Thu 28 Sep     , Grant wrote:
> >> I have a Gentoo router with eth0 connected to the WAN (DSL modem/router) 
> >and
> >> ath0 connected to the LAN.  It works perfectly.
> >>
> >> I've added two ethernet cards and I'm trying to connect from another 
> >machine
> >> to one of the new cards (eth1 and eth2).  ifconfig shows the cards are
> >> detected just fine, but dhcp always fails when trying to obtain an IP
> >> address.
> >> I have the following /etc/conf.d/net:
> >>
> >> config_eth0="192.168.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> >> routes_eth0="default via 192.168.1.1"
> >>
> >> config_ath0="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> >> mode_ath0="master"
> >> essid_ath0="mynetwork"
> >>
> >> config_eth1="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> >>
> >> config_eth2="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> >>
> >> and the following in /etc/dnsmasq.conf:
> >>
> >> interface=ath0
> >> interface=eth1
> >> interface=eth2
> >>
> >> I've started net.eth1 and net.eth2 (both are links to net.lo) and 
> >restarted
> >> dnsmasq.  I thought it might be a problem with my iptables settings which
> >> don't take the new interfaces into account, but stopping iptables doesn't
> >> seem
> >> to help.
> >>
> >> Can anyone help me out?
> >>
> >> - Grant
> >> --
> >> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> >
> >Grant,
> >    Can you ping the server? Set up the interface manually and then try.
> >Also, is the dhcp client connected directly to one of the interfaces on the
> >dhcp server? If that is the case you will need a cross over cable to do it
> >as opposed to a normal patch cable.
> 
> Ah, crossovers cables.  I guess I need to whip one of those up.  Do
> you think I can get away with just a box cutter when converting a
> patch cable if I'm careful?
> 
> Do the rest of my settings above look OK?
> 
> - Grant
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Grant,
    I have never made a cross over cable before, probs best to look on google,
there is bound to be a guide somewhere.
As for you settings, I can't see anything wrong with them.
    Regards,
        Oliver Wilson 


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Grant]

> Grant,
>     I have never made a cross over cable before, probs best to look on google,
> there is bound to be a guide somewhere.
> As for you settings, I can't see anything wrong with them.

My buddy just told me that most modern NICs do "autosensing" so they
don't require a crossover cable.  Is that right?

- Grant
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 702 bytes --]

On Thursday 28 September 2006 21:18, Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote 
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem':
> My buddy just told me that most modern NICs do "autosensing" so they
> don't require a crossover cable.  Is that right?

Yes, all GigE cards are required to do this auto-negotiation, and some (or 
at least a few) 100Mbit cards will do it as well.  Unless at least one of 
the ports you are using is GigE, don't count on it.

-- 
"If there's one thing we've established over the years,
it's that the vast majority of our users don't have the slightest
clue what's best for them in terms of package stability."
-- Gentoo Developer Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[James]

Grant <emailgrant <at> gmail.com> writes:


> I've added two ethernet cards and I'm trying to connect from another machine
> to one of the new cards (eth1 and eth2). 

Hello Grant,

If you look at /etc/conf.d/net.example, you'll get some ideas.

I have a machine with (4) interfaces and here is what I use
for /etc/conf.d/net  :


mac_eth0="00:50:DA:61:31:1C"
mac_eth1="00:48:54:62:64:FD"
mac_eth2="00:40:F4:D0:B1:96"
mac_eth3="00:48:54:62:64:FC"
iface_eth0="192.168.2.20 broadcast 192.168.3.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
iface_eth1="192.168.3.11 broadcast 192.168.3.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
iface_eth2="14.173.99.102 broadcast 14.173.99.103 netmask 255.255.255.252"
iface_eth3="192.168.4.11 broadcast 192.168.4.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"

I had troubles with the machine inconsistently assiging a given ip
address to a specific card. The 'mac' statements seem to nail this
down for me. The is for a single static IP address but there are
examples for dhcp in the /etc/conf.d/net.example file too.

Note, this experimental router is using the old syntax and is scheduled 
for lots of upgrades, so I post it here, as an example that seemed to
work for the problems I encountered a year ago. I'd be open to other
ideas..... and comments.

hth && ymmv,
James

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Mike Williams]

On Thursday 28 September 2006 05:19, Grant wrote:
> I have a Gentoo router with eth0 connected to the WAN (DSL modem/router)
> and ath0 connected to the LAN.  It works perfectly.
>
> I've added two ethernet cards and I'm trying to connect from another
> machine to one of the new cards (eth1 and eth2).  ifconfig shows the cards
> are detected just fine, but dhcp always fails when trying to obtain an IP
> address. I have the following /etc/conf.d/net:

Firstly, you really should look at /etc/conf.d/net.example and upgrade your 
config to the new format.

> config_eth0="192.168.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> routes_eth0="default via 192.168.1.1"
>
> config_ath0="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> mode_ath0="master"
> essid_ath0="mynetwork"
>
> config_eth1="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
>
> config_eth2="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"

Err, you can't assign the same IP to multiple interfaces.
You mention DHCP, did you mean that eth1 and eth2 are to get a DHCP leases 
from another server? If so, do this:
config_eth1=( "dhcp" )
config_eth2=( "dhcp" )

> I've started net.eth1 and net.eth2 (both are links to net.lo) and restarted
> dnsmasq.  I thought it might be a problem with my iptables settings which
> don't take the new interfaces into account, but stopping iptables doesn't
> seem to help.

What are you using dnsmasq for?

-- 
Mike Williams
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Grant]

> > I have a Gentoo router with eth0 connected to the WAN (DSL modem/router)
> > and ath0 connected to the LAN.  It works perfectly.
> >
> > I've added two ethernet cards and I'm trying to connect from another
> > machine to one of the new cards (eth1 and eth2).  ifconfig shows the cards
> > are detected just fine, but dhcp always fails when trying to obtain an IP
> > address. I have the following /etc/conf.d/net:
>
> Firstly, you really should look at /etc/conf.d/net.example and upgrade your
> config to the new format.

Will do.

> > config_eth0="192.168.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> > routes_eth0="default via 192.168.1.1"
> >
> > config_ath0="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> > mode_ath0="master"
> > essid_ath0="mynetwork"
> >
> > config_eth1="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> >
> > config_eth2="192.168.0.1 broadcast 192.168.0.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
>
> Err, you can't assign the same IP to multiple interfaces.
> You mention DHCP, did you mean that eth1 and eth2 are to get a DHCP leases
> from another server? If so, do this:
> config_eth1=( "dhcp" )
> config_eth2=( "dhcp" )

eth0 is connected to the WAN (DSL modem/router), and ath0, eth1, and
eth2 are all meant to allow other systems to connect to the LAN via
DHCP.  Should I be configuring eth1 and eth2 as 192.168.0.1?

> > I've started net.eth1 and net.eth2 (both are links to net.lo) and restarted
> > dnsmasq.  I thought it might be a problem with my iptables settings which
> > don't take the new interfaces into account, but stopping iptables doesn't
> > seem to help.
>
> What are you using dnsmasq for?

It's for DNS and DHCP.

- Grant
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Richard Fish]

On 9/28/06, Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote:
> eth0 is connected to the WAN (DSL modem/router), and ath0, eth1, and
> eth2 are all meant to allow other systems to connect to the LAN via
> DHCP.  Should I be configuring eth1 and eth2 as 192.168.0.1?

No.  Consider the case where your system needs to send an IP packet to
192.168.0.100.  How will it know what card to use to send that?
You've told it that 192.168.0.100 is on ath0...or eth1....or eth2.
They should be separate networks...

-Richard
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Grant]

> > eth0 is connected to the WAN (DSL modem/router), and ath0, eth1, and
> > eth2 are all meant to allow other systems to connect to the LAN via
> > DHCP.  Should I be configuring eth1 and eth2 as 192.168.0.1?
>
> No.  Consider the case where your system needs to send an IP packet to
> 192.168.0.100.  How will it know what card to use to send that?
> You've told it that 192.168.0.100 is on ath0...or eth1....or eth2.
> They should be separate networks...

I'm pretty confused.  I'm trying to get the system in question to
behave like a solid-state router that you can plug an ethernet jack
into and be on the network.  How should eth1 and eth2 be configured in
/etc/conf.d/net ?

- Grant
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 792 bytes --]

On Thursday 28 September 2006 21:43, Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote 
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem':
> I'm pretty confused.  I'm trying to get the system in question to
> behave like a solid-state router that you can plug an ethernet jack
> into and be on the network.  How should eth1 and eth2 be configured in
> /etc/conf.d/net ?

They should be configured as part of a bridge device (see the bridging 
section of /etc/conf.d/net.example) and have the address assigned (and 
DHCPD listing on) that bridge device.

-- 
"If there's one thing we've established over the years,
it's that the vast majority of our users don't have the slightest
clue what's best for them in terms of package stability."
-- Gentoo Developer Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

Hi,

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 22:06:21 -0500 "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
<bss03@volumehost.net> wrote:

> On Thursday 28 September 2006 21:43, Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com>
> wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface
> problem':
> > I'm pretty confused.  I'm trying to get the system in question to
> > behave like a solid-state router that you can plug an ethernet jack
> > into and be on the network.  How should eth1 and eth2 be configured
> > in /etc/conf.d/net ?
> 
> They should be configured as part of a bridge device (see the
> bridging section of /etc/conf.d/net.example) and have the address
> assigned (and DHCPD listing on) that bridge device.

Except that this doesn't work on WLAN (MAC layer done by the WLAN
adapter). But probably "proxy_arp" can help here. And subnet
separation, of course. Just extending the netmask a bit and enabling
proxy_arp would do the job. OTOH, it's also easy to configure the
routes to the other subnets via DHCP. Just a matter of taste. In any
case, it only works on IP layer.

-hwh
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Grant]

> > > I'm pretty confused.  I'm trying to get the system in question to
> > > behave like a solid-state router that you can plug an ethernet jack
> > > into and be on the network.  How should eth1 and eth2 be configured
> > > in /etc/conf.d/net ?
> >
> > They should be configured as part of a bridge device (see the
> > bridging section of /etc/conf.d/net.example) and have the address
> > assigned (and DHCPD listing on) that bridge device.
>
> Except that this doesn't work on WLAN (MAC layer done by the WLAN
> adapter). But probably "proxy_arp" can help here. And subnet
> separation, of course. Just extending the netmask a bit and enabling
> proxy_arp would do the job. OTOH, it's also easy to configure the
> routes to the other subnets via DHCP. Just a matter of taste. In any
> case, it only works on IP layer.

Sounds like I'm getting in over my head.  I think it would be smarter
for me to buy a $15 switch from NewEgg instead of trying to configure
my Gentoo router to use its extra NICs this way.  Is there any reason
I wouldn't want to do that?

I've never used a switch before.  Is there any proprietary software to
configure (like with a router), or is it just a button or two?  I like
to keep my non-Gentoo software to a minimum, hence the Gentoo router.

- Grant
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 297 bytes --]

On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 08:18:38 -0700, Grant wrote:

> I've never used a switch before.  Is there any proprietary software to
> configure (like with a router), or is it just a button or two?

Just one button, the power switch :)


-- 
Neil Bothwick

If I save time, when do I get it back?

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Thomas T. Veldhouse]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 08:18:38 -0700, Grant wrote:
>
>   
>> I've never used a switch before.  Is there any proprietary software to
>> configure (like with a router), or is it just a button or two?
>>     
>
> Just one button, the power switch :)
>   
Sometimes two ... if you attempt to use the uplink port [and it doesn't 
have autosense].

Tom Veldhouse

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[darren kirby]

quoth the Thomas T. Veldhouse:
> Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 08:18:38 -0700, Grant wrote:
> >> I've never used a switch before.  Is there any proprietary software to
> >> configure (like with a router), or is it just a button or two?
> >
> > Just one button, the power switch :)
>
> Sometimes two ... if you attempt to use the uplink port [and it doesn't
> have autosense].
> Tom Veldhouse

Interesting. Mine doesn't have any power buttons. Unless you consider yanking 
the power cable a 'button'.

-d
-- 
darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org
"...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected..."
- Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, June 1972
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Thomas T. Veldhouse]

Grant wrote:
>> > > I'm pretty confused.  I'm trying to get the system in question to
>> > > behave like a solid-state router that you can plug an ethernet jack
>> > > into and be on the network.  How should eth1 and eth2 be configured
>> > > in /etc/conf.d/net ?
>> >
>> > They should be configured as part of a bridge device (see the
>> > bridging section of /etc/conf.d/net.example) and have the address
>> > assigned (and DHCPD listing on) that bridge device.
>>
>> Except that this doesn't work on WLAN (MAC layer done by the WLAN
>> adapter). But probably "proxy_arp" can help here. And subnet
>> separation, of course. Just extending the netmask a bit and enabling
>> proxy_arp would do the job. OTOH, it's also easy to configure the
>> routes to the other subnets via DHCP. Just a matter of taste. In any
>> case, it only works on IP layer.
>
> Sounds like I'm getting in over my head.  I think it would be smarter
> for me to buy a $15 switch from NewEgg instead of trying to configure
> my Gentoo router to use its extra NICs this way.  Is there any reason
> I wouldn't want to do that?
Use a switch.  Using multiple interfaces to act as a switch is a waste 
of a good interface.  Interfaces are better used to isolate networks 
from each other.  I have one for my WAN, one for my LAN and one for my 
WIFI LAN.   The latter is a very restricted area in case somebody hacks 
the WPA encryption on my WIFI, they still won't have real access to 
anything important.

Each interface should have its own network, except in rare cases where 
bridging is desired.


Tom Veldhouse


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2912 bytes --]

On Monday 02 October 2006 10:18, Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote 
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem':
> > > > I'm pretty confused.  I'm trying to get the system in question to
> > > > behave like a solid-state router that you can plug an ethernet
> > > > jack into and be on the network.

FYI, that doesn't require the router to have a unique IP.  You could simply 
configure each router port as a separate subnet, if you really wanted to.

> > > > How should eth1 and eth2 be 
> > > > configured in /etc/conf.d/net ?
> > > They should be configured as part of a bridge device (see the
> > > bridging section of /etc/conf.d/net.example) and have the address
> > > assigned (and DHCPD listing on) that bridge device.
> > Except that this doesn't work on WLAN (MAC layer done by the WLAN
> > adapter).

eth1 and eth2 are both wired, no?  How does 802.11a/b/g come into this?

> > But probably "proxy_arp" can help here. And subnet 
> > separation, of course. Just extending the netmask a bit and enabling
> > proxy_arp would do the job. OTOH, it's also easy to configure the
> > routes to the other subnets via DHCP. Just a matter of taste. In any
> > case, it only works on IP layer.

I must admit that I've never used proxy_arp, but all ARP traffic occurs at 
the ethernet layer, below the IP layer, so it doesn't make sense to me for 
an option/program so named to only work on IP traffic.  ARP is also only 
used intra-subnet, so this entire section doesn't make much sense to me.

In *any* case, it's extremely unlikely that the OP is going to be carrying 
any significant amount of non-IP traffic.  I feel that is an extraordinary 
enough condition to be mentioned.

> I've never used a switch before.  Is there any proprietary software to
> configure (like with a router), or is it just a button or two?

Generally a switch will have no configurable software; if it has anything 
worth configuring the manufacturer will call it a router and add 10-15$ to 
the price tag.  In any case, I doubt you'll find a switch that supports 
802.11a/b/g, since they will always require a little bit of configuration 
(ESSID and keys).

You could get a wireless router (e.g. Linksys' WRT line), but they will 
have some software configuration.  If you choose the right model, it'll be 
Linux instead of proprietary software.  However, I know of no wireless 
routers that come from the manufacturer with Gentoo installed.  In fact, 
I'm fairly sure that Gentoo doesn't provide any profiles, support, or even 
instructions for running on such hardware, which has severe [compared to a 
desktop] hw limitations.

-- 
"If there's one thing we've established over the years,
it's that the vast majority of our users don't have the slightest
clue what's best for them in terms of package stability."
-- Gentoo Developer Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

Hi,

On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 10:49:34 -0500
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." <bss03@volumehost.net> wrote:

> > > > > How should eth1 and eth2 be 
> > > > > configured in /etc/conf.d/net ?
> > > > They should be configured as part of a bridge device (see the
> > > > bridging section of /etc/conf.d/net.example) and have the address
> > > > assigned (and DHCPD listing on) that bridge device.
> > > Except that this doesn't work on WLAN (MAC layer done by the WLAN
> > > adapter).
> 
> eth1 and eth2 are both wired, no?  How does 802.11a/b/g come into this?

Yeah, that's just me not reading carefully. But looking at the first
post by the OP, I thought that ath0 was meant to join eth1 and eth2.
See my other mail, I've just clarified this.

> > > But probably "proxy_arp" can help here. And subnet 
> > > separation, of course. Just extending the netmask a bit and enabling
> > > proxy_arp would do the job. OTOH, it's also easy to configure the
> > > routes to the other subnets via DHCP. Just a matter of taste. In any
> > > case, it only works on IP layer.
> 
> I must admit that I've never used proxy_arp, but all ARP traffic occurs at 
> the ethernet layer, below the IP layer, so it doesn't make sense to me for 
> an option/program so named to only work on IP traffic.  ARP is also only 
> used intra-subnet, so this entire section doesn't make much sense to me.

Well, for something like a bridge, it has to work inter-(physical-)
subnet. Of course ARP happens on top of the link layer, just as IP. But
ARP is a requirement for IP traffic. And by faking ARP answers for the
computer in the other subnet, a router can redirect IP traffic to
itself. It just claims all addresses in the other subnet. That's what
"proxy_arp" does. So when it in fact uses forwarding, it behaves
similar to a bridge w/ regard to that you don't need to configure all
the computers with a route to the other subnet.

> In *any* case, it's extremely unlikely that the OP is going to be carrying 
> any significant amount of non-IP traffic.  I feel that is an extraordinary 
> enough condition to be mentioned.

Agreed.

-hwh
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Grant]

> > > > > > How should eth1 and eth2 be
> > > > > > configured in /etc/conf.d/net ?
> > > > > They should be configured as part of a bridge device (see the
> > > > > bridging section of /etc/conf.d/net.example) and have the address
> > > > > assigned (and DHCPD listing on) that bridge device.
> > > > Except that this doesn't work on WLAN (MAC layer done by the WLAN
> > > > adapter).
> >
> > eth1 and eth2 are both wired, no?  How does 802.11a/b/g come into this?
>
> Yeah, that's just me not reading carefully. But looking at the first
> post by the OP, I thought that ath0 was meant to join eth1 and eth2.
> See my other mail, I've just clarified this.
>
> > > > But probably "proxy_arp" can help here. And subnet
> > > > separation, of course. Just extending the netmask a bit and enabling
> > > > proxy_arp would do the job. OTOH, it's also easy to configure the
> > > > routes to the other subnets via DHCP. Just a matter of taste. In any
> > > > case, it only works on IP layer.
> >
> > I must admit that I've never used proxy_arp, but all ARP traffic occurs at
> > the ethernet layer, below the IP layer, so it doesn't make sense to me for
> > an option/program so named to only work on IP traffic.  ARP is also only
> > used intra-subnet, so this entire section doesn't make much sense to me.
>
> Well, for something like a bridge, it has to work inter-(physical-)
> subnet. Of course ARP happens on top of the link layer, just as IP. But
> ARP is a requirement for IP traffic. And by faking ARP answers for the
> computer in the other subnet, a router can redirect IP traffic to
> itself. It just claims all addresses in the other subnet. That's what
> "proxy_arp" does. So when it in fact uses forwarding, it behaves
> similar to a bridge w/ regard to that you don't need to configure all
> the computers with a route to the other subnet.
>
> > In *any* case, it's extremely unlikely that the OP is going to be carrying
> > any significant amount of non-IP traffic.  I feel that is an extraordinary
> > enough condition to be mentioned.

I'm afraid I can't keep up with you guys here.  What I'd like to do is
use eth1 and ath0 on my router to "serve" the same local network.  Can
I bridge them according to net.example to accomplish this?  I
understand that I will either need to use a crossover cable with eth1
or attach a switch to eth1.

- Grant
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Grant]

> > I'm afraid I can't keep up with you guys here.  What I'd like to do is
> > use eth1 and ath0 on my router to "serve" the same local network.  Can
> > I bridge them according to net.example to accomplish this?  I
> > understand that I will either need to use a crossover cable with eth1
> > or attach a switch to eth1.
> >
> > - Grant
>
> Hi,
>
> Shorewall (net-firewall/shorewall) can help you do this very easily,
> simply by adding both eth1 and eth0 to the local zone and enabling IP
> forwarding.
>
> Check out http://shorewall.net/two-interface.htm, under the section
> "Adding a Wireless Segment to your Two-Interface Firewall".  I use this
> method myself for exactly that purpose - eth0 on the internet, eth1
> wired, and ath0 wireless.  It's easy to substitute eth2 (or whatever
> interface(s) you're using) for ath0 in that scenario.

This sounds like the right thing to do if it's as simple as that.  I
think I do want the wired and wireless interfaces on the same network
for now.  Setting up a DMZ for a web server does sound like an
interesting project though....

- Grant
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[David Talkington]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Grant wrote:

> I think it would be smarter for me to buy a $15 switch from NewEgg 
> instead of trying to configure my Gentoo router to use its extra NICs 
> this way.  Is there any reason I wouldn't want to do that?

Academic exercises aside, the only reasons I can think of to use a 
general-purpose computing device for this purpose instead of a simple 
switch would be a) cost, or b) to do something that the switch can't do, 
such as firewall.  If you really just want a switch, and the money isn't 
a big deal, go with the switch.

That said ... strictly speaking, what you're asking for is a bridge, 
which may not be the easiest way to accomplish your ends, nor the most 
flexible configuration.  Maybe consider this easy approach:

- - create a separate network for each NIC (maybe 192.168.2.0 and
   192.168.1.0), and give each an appropriate IP address (maybe 2.1 and
   1.1 respectively).

- - enable IP forwarding, and NAT if appropriate for outbound traffic
   (sounds like you already know how to do that).

- - Make sure your DHCP server listens on each of those networks and has
   an address pool for each.  I run mine right on the gateway, and ensure
   that it doesn't listen to the public address.

That's basically it.  A big advantage of this is that if you want, now 
you can easily isolate one of those segments to create a DMZ for a web 
server or a playstation or something else fun.

Cheers -d

- --
David Talkington

PGP key: http://www.prairienet.org/~dtalk/004B8F8B.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFJsJ95FKhdwBLj4sRAsW7AKCgfMIGU/wuOSR2dWGfnBJuWiROEwCcDzhN
bQ75d9ixEQCCFemWRkAQcX4=
=GRZ8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Router 3rd and 4th net interface problem

[Richard Fish]

On 9/27/06, Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a Gentoo router with eth0 connected to the WAN (DSL modem/router) and
> ath0 connected to the LAN.  It works perfectly.
>
> I've added two ethernet cards and I'm trying to connect from another machine
> to one of the new cards (eth1 and eth2).  ifconfig shows the cards are
> detected just fine, but dhcp always fails when trying to obtain an IP address.
> I have the following /etc/conf.d/net:
>
> config_eth0="192.168.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> routes_eth0="default via 192.168.1.1"

Take another look at net.example.  These should be:

config_eth0=( "192.168.1.2 netmask 255.255.255.0" )
routes_eth0=( "default via 192.168.1.1" )

ditto for the other config_ lines.

-Richard
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list