Re: Not firewall, but what?

[Jussi Hirvi <listmember@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 10.5.2010 12.50, Kahlil Hodgson wrote:
> I'd opt for NAT and policy-based routing.  I'll get back to you with
> details after I've had my diner ;-)
>
> Cheers!
>
> Kal

Hm, NAT might be difficult, because there are common ports to the guest 
systems. Below is more detail:

If we say network
	A = 62.220.237.x and
	B = 62.236.221.x

My guest systems are:
- name server (port 53) (network B)
- mail server (80,443,25,465,995.993,563,636) (network A)
- secondary mail server to a mail server in another box (25,465)
	(preferably network A AND B, for maximum availability)
- a test system, can be in either network (but port 22 required)

Of course I could rearrange, for example set up another xen box for one 
of these mail servers.

- Jussi

-- 
Jussi Hirvi * Green Spot
Topeliuksenkatu 15 C * 00250 Helsinki * Finland
Tel. +358 9 493 981 * Mobile +358 40 771 2098 (only sms)
jussi.hirvi@xxxxxxxxxxxx * http://www.greenspot.fi
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos