On Wednesday 26 April 2006 11:37, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 10:05:15AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> It was given an dhcp
>> address according to the logs on the firewall box, but apparently
>> not a gateway address.
>>
>> Should the dhcpd protocol have handled that?
>
>Yes, it should and it does.
>
>> It is not setup in the dhcpd.conf I'm using,
>
>In such case clients, obviously enough, are not getting that
>information too.
>
>Look at 'man dhcpd.conf' and there is an example there which starts
>with:
>
> subnet 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 {
> option routers 10.0.0.254; <--- this is your gateway address
Humm, I had that set for 192.168.1.1, which is the address of my router,
which is on a different subnet from the rest of the house.
When I set dhcpd.conf up, it absolutely had to know all the bloody
details of both network cards in that box before it would even start
the daemon, and I would have assumed, since there is only one card on
the local side of this dhcp server, that info on that card only would
have been sufficient to make it work. The other card only comes into
play, going out toward the internet, when a request is forwarded out by
iptables.
My normal path is gateway 192.168.xx.1 for all local machines, with
iptables sending stuff on to 192.168.1.1 (the router, and it then
functions in the gateway mode) and sends the data on out to the dsl
modem and vice versa for return data if its from an established
connection.
If this is set correctly for the NIC on the local network address, can I
then do away with all the data for the subnet the router is on? It
sure seems like I should be able to, it has no need of any knowledge of
the outside path on the other side of iptables.
And I asked this list because the firewall is a rh7.3 box yet, running a
2.4.30 kernel, but its still rh7.3... I'd say thats legacy for
sure. :)
At any rate, I've now changed that in the sections for both cards and
I'll see it it works if I take the GATEWAY statement out of the lappies
ifcfg-wlan0 file.
> ......
>
>Name servers and ntpd servers and various others things can be
>specified there too.
>
>It is true that dhcpd documentation could be really better, and one
>often has to rely on various examples to figure our how to set up
>things, but this has nothing to do with legacy issues so this looks
>like a really wrong list for questions of that sort.
[...]
--
Cheers, Gene
People having trouble with vz bouncing email to me should add the word
'online' between the 'verizon', and the dot which bypasses vz's
stupid bounce rules. I do use spamassassin too. :-)
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2006 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
--
fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
