On 10/27/20 5:35 PM, Tim via users wrote:
On Mon, 2020-10-26 at 17:02 +0000, Steve Hill wrote:
In addition to 198.51.100.1 and 192.51.100.2, the ISP is providing
28 extra public IPs (192.51.100.3-30), and I want to the firewall to
be able to DNAT those IPs to internal machines, which means it needs
to answer ARP for them.
The router is routing all of the public IPs directly to its internal
NIC. In an ideal world, we'd just reconfigure the router so that the
IPs are routed via the firewall rather than being directly
connected. However, I'm finding that for managed routers, ISPs are
increasingly unwilling to set up custom routing.
I'm curious how they expected you to use their extra IPs if they won't
let their router be configured for them.
It is configured for them, but it's expecting them to all be on the
local network which is the typical case, not through another gateway.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
