Dan,<br><br>Thanks for the reply. The client is a laptop running Windows XP Home EditionI'. Server is a tower running Gentoo 2006.1, shorewall 3.0.8.<br><br>The client is setup as follows:<br>IP address: <a href="http://192.168.1.2"> 192.168.1.2</a><br>Netmask: <a href="http://255.255.255.0">255.255.255.0</a><br>Gateway: <a href="http://192.168.1.1">192.168.1.1</a><br>DNS: <a href="http://192.168.1.1">192.168.1.1</a><br><br>I've changed my /etc/conf.d/net to: <br><br># Interface Handler<br>modules=( "ifconfig" )<br><br># eth0 (WAN) config<br>config_eth0=( "dhcp" )<br><br># eth1 (LAN) config<br>config_eth1=( "<a href="http://192.168.1.1">192.168.1.1</a> netmask <a href="http://255.255.255.0">255.255.255.0</a> broadcast <a href="http://192.168.1.255">192.168.1.255</a>" )<br><br>Amongst many other things, shorewall dump shows:<br><br>Shorewall has detected the following iptables/netfilter capabilities: <br> NAT: Available<br> Packet Mangling: Available<br> Multi-port Match: Available<br> Extended Multi-port Match: Available<br> Connection Tracking Match: Available<br> Packet Type Match: Available<br> Policy Match: Available <br> Physdev Match: Not available<br> IP range Match: Available<br> Recent Match: Available<br> Owner Match: Available<br> Ipset Match: Not available<br> CONNMARK Target: Not available<br> Connmark Match: Available <br> Raw Table: Available<br> CLASSIFY Target: Available<br> FORWARD Mangle Chain: Available<br><br>So, I think I have all that I need compiled into my kernel (2.6.19-r1). I'll be home in a bit, and I'll get on the Windows computer and run ipconfig and route to find out what the IP info and routing table looks like on the client and post that. <br><br>Thanks again for your help.<br><br>Shawn<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 2/2/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Dan Farrell</b> <<a href="mailto:dan@spore.ath.cx">dan@spore.ath.cx</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 12:07:59 -0500<br>"Shawn Singh" <<a href="mailto:callmeshawn@gmail.com">callmeshawn@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br>> Hello list,<br>><br>> I've got my /etc/conf.d/net setup as follows: <br>><br>> # Interface Handler<br>> modules=( "ifconfig" )<br>><br>> # eth0 (WAN) config<br>> config_eth0=( "dhcp" )<br>><br>> # eth1 (LAN) config<br>> config_eth1=( "<a href="http://192.168.1.1"> 192.168.1.1</a> netmask <a href="http://255.255.255.0">255.255.255.0</a> broadcast<br>> <a href="http://192.168.1.255">192.168.1.255</a>" ) routes_eth1=( "<a href="http://192.168.1.0">192.168.1.0</a> via <a href="http://192.168.1.1"> 192.168.1.1</a>" ) # the<br>> idea here is that I wish to have all traffic intended for hosts on<br>> <a href="http://192.168.1.0">192.168.1.0</a> pass through <a href="http://192.168.1.1">192.168.1.1</a>.<br><br> all on the 'server' right? The 'server' doesn't need a route to<br><a href="http://192.168.1.0">192.168.1.0</a> through <a href="http://192.168.1.1">192.168.1.1</a>. That's going to be automatic on the <br>server's end because of the line<br>> <a href="http://192.168.1.0">192.168.1.0</a> * <a href="http://255.255.255.0">255.255.255.0</a> U 0 0 0 eth1<br>in route. A route through eth1 to the subnet eth1 is on will <br>automatically be added. But does the 'client' computer have such a<br>default route through <a href="http://192.168.1.1">192.168.1.1</a>? The command to set up such a route<br>(again, on the client) would be <br><br> route add default gw <a href="http://192.168.1.1">192.168.1.1</a>;<br><br>> Here's the output from ifconfig eth1:<br>looks fine.<br><br>> This is my routing table:<br>looks fine, as long as it's from the server and not the client. <br><br>> One odd thing is, if I run mii-tool eth1, I get:<br>> eth1: no link<br>> eth1 is connected to my client machine via crossover cable (the wire<br>> scheme A end is plugged into eth1, and the wire scheme b end is <br>> plugged into the client machine)<br>You clearly know the difference between a patch and a crossover, but i<br>don't see why the interfaces arent' registering a conection.<br>> I'm experiencing difficulty where my client can't get to the Internet <br>> (the pages just time out)<br>you need ip forwarding enabled to pull that off.<br>> I can't ping the gateway (<a href="http://192.168.1.1">192.168.1.1</a>)<br>> from the client. Also, from the firewall, I can't ping the client <br>> machine ( <a href="http://192.168.1.2">192.168.1.2</a>).<br>This should be working right now, though. Can you post the ipconfig<br>and route output from the 'client' ?<br><br>> Pings from the firewall to the client result in Destination <br>> Unreachable, and if I remember correctly, pings from the client to<br>> the firewall just time out.<br>sounds like the client is not actually 'connected'. Although, clearly<br>the physical connection is there. <br><br>> I'm running shorewall (v 3.0.8), so I've tried shutting it down<br>> (shorewall clear) to eliminate that as an option, but still not<br>> getting anywhere.<br>oh oh. shorewall can really confuse things. Stop shorewall and have <br>it save your iptables output, then I would suggest flushing<br>> .config has the following entries in it, please let me know if there<br>> are others that you need to see.<br>><br>> CONFIG_IP_ADVANCED_ROUTER=y <br>you don't need this.<br>> CONFIG_NETFILTER=y<br>> CONFIG_IP_NF_NAT=y<br>you will need this. But only oce you get connected to <a href="http://192.168.1.1">192.168.1.1</a> !<br>remember, the client needs a default route set. The server _isn't_ <br>going to need a route to 192.168.1/24 explicitly set in conf.d/net<br><br>> Thanks,<br>><br>> Shawn<br>I'm on comcast too:<br><br>20: <a href="http://c-71-xxx-144-1.hsd1.fl.comcast.net">c-71-xxx-144-1.hsd1.fl.comcast.net </a><br>(<a href="http://71.203.144.1">71.203.144.1</a>) asymm 21 167.516ms reached Resume: pmtu 1500 hops 20<br>back 21<br><br>only 1 country's width and 20/21 hops away from you! I mangled your ip<br>address even though you provide it yourself, to allow you to be the one <br>invading your privacy and not me .<br><br>ps, if you have a switch around, i bet it would work if you plugged in<br>both to switch (/ hub) via patch cable. I bet your crossover is bad.<br>--<br><a href="mailto:gentoo-user@gentoo.org"> gentoo-user@gentoo.org</a> mailing list<br><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>"Doing linear scans over an associative array is like trying to club someone to death with a loaded Uzi."<br>Larry Wall