Search squid archive

Re: Help! one more time on on Squid3.HEAD(20110307), TPROXY4 and Iptables 1.4.9 + ebtables

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

 



On 20/03/11 06:38, Jim Binder wrote:
Think I finally figured it out...   It was internal routing as I had expected.   Remember, eth0 (inside), eth1(admin), eth2(inet)...

The issue was that i had two interfaces on the same network 192.168.1.x... (br0 and eth1)  One being the bridge (br0) and the other being the Admin interface I was using (addr. via DHCP).   Because the it was the first entry in the route table to the network, linux wasn't sending packets from squid into the bridge.


Great catch!

This works:

192.168.1.0/24 dev br0  proto kernel  scope link  src 192.168.1.88
192.168.1.0/24 dev eth1  proto kernel  scope link  src 192.168.1.91
default via 192.168.1.254 dev eth1
default via 192.168.1.254 dev br0

This doesn't:

192.168.1.0/24 dev eth1  proto kernel  scope link  src 192.168.1.91
192.168.1.0/24 dev br0  proto kernel  scope link  src 192.168.1.88
default via 192.168.1.254 dev br0
default via 192.168.1.254 dev eth1

My simple solution was to release the ip addr of eth1 (dhcp -r eth1) and then assign dhcp to br0 and then re-dhcp eth1.

Have to think about if I can craft a policy to do the right thing regardless of order without having to release eth1.  Till then it works fine.


Setting a high metric for the eth1 should do it. Though I'm not sure how one achieves that on DHCP assignment.

You might want to update the twiki


Updated. Thank you for the details. Does this look right?
http://wiki.squid-cache.org/Features/Tproxy4#Timeouts_with_Squid_running_as_a_bridge_or_multiple-NIC

Amos
--
Please be using
  Current Stable Squid 2.7.STABLE9 or 3.1.11
  Beta testers wanted for 3.2.0.5


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Samba]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Linux USB]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux