> -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Tremer [mailto:michael.tremer(a)ipfire.org] > Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 11:48 > To: Alexander Weber > Cc: development(a)lists.ipfire.org > Subject: Re: static via dhcp/pppoe + additonal static IPs (UK BT infinity, AT/CH > UPC Business, CH Init7) > > Hi, > > On Mon, 2015-05-18 at 12:56 +0000, Alexander Weber wrote: > > Sorry, noted. > > no worries. > > > Challenge: add static IPs (/32) or a routed subnet to a non STATIC RED > connection eg. DHCP, PPPoE, Dial-Up etc. > > > > Obvious issue(s) w/ solution: > > - Error message in aliases.cgi -> just cosmetic and a quick rewrite to > > "|| DHCP" or whatever we got workging later > > - /etc/rcd/init.d/networking/red starts setaliases (c-program) only if > > STATIC -> again a quick rewrite to run the script whith other settings > > - /usr/local/bin/setaliases gets variables from the > /var/ipfire/network/aliases without issues, but /var/ipfire/network/settings > does not contain them when connection is not static, eg. red gateway or red > subnetmask. > > In this case I assume the vars need to come from ipfire/dhcpc and the > ethernet setting? > > Please commit these changes to a git repository so that we can keep track of > them individually. > > As far as I understand, you already changed the aliases.cgi file. So this is > probably done? > > I sent you a changed version of the setaliases binary. Do these changes > work? [APW] Will commit when I have a working config. Yes, aliases.cgi and /etc/rcd/init.d/networking/red, however these changes do not make sense when the rest is not working. [APW] The file you sent me worked, however, as these variables need to come from other files when not STATIC, so it does not collect the right information yet. Therefore I wanted to find the working confg first before bothering you again for a recompile. > > The last point is a bit tricky. The setting file is read to find out about the > netmask and broadcast address. The broadcast address is not actually > needed if we replace that ifconfig command by the ip command (even > ifconfig should not require it). > [APW] indeed, ifconfig does not need a subnet/gw but will then try to be clever and set it on his own mostly to xy.255.255.255 which is obviously wrong. Nevertheless I gave event this config a shot but got then kind of strange routing when pinging from outside, where the last hops where: Provider - IPFire - Provider - 85.195.224.66 > The bit with the netmask is more complicated. setaliases assumes that the > network is one network in which all the IP addresses are. That is most likely > not the case for your DHCP setup and you usually don't get consecutive IP > addresses when you order extra ones in a data center. > They will give you what ever is not allocated. > [APW] Exactly > So I suppose that it should be fine if we set those up with /32 as you do > further below. I am not aware if any disadvantages. > > > Config: > > Static via DHCP > > IP: 212.51.153.253 > > SN: 255.255.255.0 > > GW: 212.51.153.1 > > BC: 212.51.153.255 > > > > Static routed subnet: 85.195.224.64/29 > > > > Real issue(s) w/o solution: > > So I tried directly attaching each IP to make all IPs available to DNAT: > > > > $ ifconfig red0:0 85.195.224.64 netmask 255.255.255.255 up $ $ > > /usr/sbin/arping -c 1 -w 1 -i red0 -S 85.195.224.64 212.51.153.1 In > > WebIFC with the corresponding DNAT and SNAT entry > > > > And routed: > > $ ifconfig red0:0 85.195.224.65 netmask 255.255.255.248 up $ $ > > /usr/sbin/arping -c 1 -w 1 -i red0 -S 85.195.224.65 85.195.224.64 In > > WebIFC, static routes: 85.195.224.64/29 gw: 85.195.224.65 > > > > With or without any configuration changes except firewall rules the > package leaves the origin, arrives at the correct alias, is correctly transmitted > to the destination server. The corresponging ACK comes back from the > destination server, leaves the firewall on RED but never arrives athe the > origin. > > > > I called the provider and he sees the incoming pacakges correctly routing, > but he cannot inspect the outgoing ones and state if they are correct or not. > > > > Forum: > > > http://forum.ipfire.org/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=12800&sid=08a461d562a2eea > > 83d1224c2980882ab > > > > Any ideas hints or comments are highly appreciated. > > It is a bit hard to say what is going wrong here. Do you think that the firewall > drops the packet? [APW] Mh, from what I see it does not, but cannot confirm as I do not have any way to intercept traffic after it left IPFire. Mh, I do, when I bring up virtualIPFire whitin my GREEN, assigning IP via DHCP. Then set a static route on my realIPFire to a /29 subnet different to my GREEN. Finally NetworkMonitor/Whireshark. VM is booting, I'll report back later or tomorrow. Cheers, Alex > > -Michael > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Alex > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Michael Tremer [mailto:michael.tremer(a)ipfire.org] > > Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 12:47 > > To: Alexander Weber > > Cc: development(a)lists.ipfire.org > > Subject: Re: static via dhcp/pppoe + additonal static IPs (UK BT > > infinity, AT/CH UPC Business, CH Init7) > > > > Hello Alex, > > > > we speak English on this list. > > > > What I would need for a beginning is recap of what is supposed to be done > here and what the current state of your efforts is. > > > > I have not been following the forum thread very closely and I am now not > in a position to tell what is working and what is not and what problem you are > trying to solve right now. > > > > Best, > > -Michael > > > > On Tue, 2015-05-05 at 14:44 +0000, Alexander Weber wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Haette auch vermutet einfach den GW von der DHCP Adresse > herzunehmen > > > tut, aber wohl nein. > > > > > > Ich glaube das grosse Problem liegt daran, dass eine IP aus einem > > > Subnet fix per DHCP kommt und die weiteren IPs aus einem Anderen. > > > Vielleicht bin ich auch zu ungeduldig, siehe > > > http://shorewall.net/shorewall_setup_guide.htm#ProxyARP > kommender > > > Absatz CAUTION und der Provider hats nicht geaendert – dagegen > > > spricht aber ein traceroute (siehe Attachments). > > > > > > Pfsense hat es geloest, da heist es VIP, ich lad mir mal die Distro > > > und schaue mir an wie es dort geloest ist, vielleicht bringt das ja > > > noch eine Idee. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ > __________ > > > __ > > > Sent: Tue May 05, 2015 12:51 pm > > > From: MichaelTremer > > > Recipient:NODeeJay > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > das sind jetzt nicht gerade all zu viele Informationen... > > > > > > Grundsätzlich ist das egal welche Subnetzmaske du benutzt. Das > > > Gateway ist doch sowieso klar oder? Oder ist wirklich eine Adresse > > > aus dem Netz das Gateway für das Netz? > > > > > > Können wir die ganze Diskussion auch auf der Devel Mailing Liste > > > führen? Dann sind mehr Leute dabei... > > > > > > NODeeJay wrote:Hey Michael, > > > > > > ich hab jetzt alles was mir einfiel versucht, mit SNAT/DNAT, ohne, > > > mit dem Gateway vom der DHCP Adresse, mit einer Route zum > gerouteten > > > Netz etc. > > > In allen Faellen gehen lt. tcpdump auch ACKs raus, kommen aber nie an. > > > Arping liefert uebrigens auch immer 100% Verlust. Vielleicht bin ich > > > mittelerweile auch Konsolenblind geworden. > > > > > > Config > > > statische via DHCP > > > IP: 212.51.153.253 > > > SN: 255.255.255.0 > > > GW: 212.51.153.1 > > > BC: 212.51.153.255 > > > > > > fixe: 85.195.224.64/29 > > > > > > was m.E. funktionierte sollte > > > nicht gerouted: > > > > > > Code: Select all > > > > > > $ ifconfig red0:0 85.195.224.64 netmask 255.255.255.255 up $ > > > /usr/sbin/arping -c 1 -w 1 -i red0 -S 85.195.224.64 212.51.153.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > gerouted: > > > > > > Code: Select all > > > > > > $ ifconfig red0:0 85.195.224.65 netmask 255.255.255.248 up $ > > > /usr/sbin/arping -c 1 -w 1 -i red0 -S 85.195.224.65 85.195.224.64 > > > > > > > > > > > > und die Route unter den statischen mit 85.195.224.64/29 gw: > > > 85.195.224.65 eingetragen. > > > > > > beim Provider ist lt Provider alles i.O. > > > > > > Vielleicht siehst Du noch wo das Problem sein koennte, im Prinzip > > > ist es ja nichts anderes als auf DD-WRT > > > http://www.dd-wrt.com/phpBB2/viewtopic. ... 639#211639. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Development mailing list > > > Development(a)lists.ipfire.org > > > http://lists.ipfire.org/mailman/listinfo/development