Re: Basic Routing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Grant Taylor wrote:
No Internet - but still private networks. So Router C has a route for the network 'A' 192.168.0.0/24 and route to reach router 'D'. Router 'D' knows about network 'B' 192.168.1.0 and router 'C'. D and C talk to each other, just because, on their own network of 172.16.0.0/16. Is any NAT required for this conversation? In particular - do Linux routers require SNAT lines for this? Or just routing tables?

No.  NAT is not required.

I guess here's a Linux specific question - as opposed to the more general IP/routing discussion we've been having.

Given a Linux box with multiple networks on one or more interfaces (192.168.0.1 on eth0, 192.168.5.1 on eth0:0, 172.26.0.1 on eth1, etc.) - and just adding a "1" to /proc/sys/net/ip_forward - will this magic box be able to forward packets between the networks without further configuration? Or will this require NAT statements from iptables (and no, this is NOT an opportunity to tell me about ipchains/ebtables/other-Linux-networking-specialty-program-kernel-interface-I-didn't-mention)?

Ok fine - if you can recommend a tool to make this easier - I'd be delighted to hear about it. Right now my configuration tool is firehol.
--
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Netfilter Development]     [Linux Kernel Networking Development]     [Netem]     [Berkeley Packet Filter]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Advanced Routing & Traffice Control]     [Bugtraq]

  Powered by Linux