Linux - NetworkingThis forum is for any issue related to networks or networking.
Routing, network cards, OSI, etc. Anything is fair game.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Hi there,
Can anybody explains, how Class A and Class C networks interconnected? I'm stuck with that since I try to connect 'em using linux ip aliasing method. Is it posiible?
I'm on Slack9 and I hope there's some suggestions regarding that.
[1][the internet]
|
|
|
[2][a web-caching server]
192.168.0.1:4480
|
|
[100mbps Switch]
| | |
| | |----[3][the Slackware router+iptables with 1 NIC and two IP alias]
| | 192.168.0.103 [eth0]
| | 192.168.1.1 [eth0:0]
| |
| |-------[4][Win98 clients from room1]
| 192.168.0.xxx
|
|-----------[5][Win98 clients from room2]
192.168.1.xxx
My question, how could I make the these subnets communicate each other?
My priority is to make all traffic from [5] should go through [3] before it goes to [2].
Is this going to happen or "just forget about it?"
But the configuration you have described is very strange for me (apart from the poor drawing :) because:
1. usually router is the computer which is placed between "world" and LAN
2. router should have 2 NICs not connected to the same switch (or hub) - on the other case the firewall won't be able to play correctly
3. the cashing servers are usually inside LAN so they don't connect to the internet directly (but via router)
4. why the cashing server has not an public IP (or it has got but not shown?)
1. usually router is the computer which is placed between "world" and LAN
Is this means that the web-caching server should be connected to the router? The router acts as a gateway to the outside world.
Quote:
2. router should have 2 NICs not connected to the same switch (or hub) - on the other case the firewall won't be able to play correctly
I'm using IP aliasing for that to create some sort of two NICs. Is it possible or IP aliasing is just for anything else? I'm misinterpreted the term IP aliasing maybe...
Quote:
4. why the cashing server has not an public IP (or it has got but not shown?)
The web-caching server is not having any public domain since it is used to speed up LAN internet access purposes only. It is not proxying apache to the outside world.
internet ("world")
|
| 1st NIC with external IP
|/
router (iptables)
|\
| 2nd NIC with internal IP (f. ex. 192.168.0.103)
|
switch
|--- local server (www proxy)
|--- box 1
|--- box 2
This way you can really separate internal LAN from the world (assuming correct firewall)
2. IP aliasing is nothing as far as security. Although 192.168.x.x are theoretically "non-routable" there is a lot of attacks with the packet which are crafted with source and/or destination IP addresses from this range.
4. So your drawing is incorrect - the line from internet goes to the web-caching server and next (another line) goes from server to the switch. To get such topology you need 2 NICs (like above)
BTW: public IP <> public domain
I have the exact (or so) architecture and it's working well.
The only difference is that I have a box acting as a router in the middle of all box. This "router" does NAT to internet AND external connection, so both subnet can talk.
Just do some search 'bout NAT, it's a great thing.
LOL sorry my second sentences is bad. I meant that instead of having a switch thhe this switch connected to a linux router, I ONLY have a linux router ( a cool P120 with 4 networks card in it ). 2 of these network card are connected directly to computers, 1 of these is connected to an hub and the last to internet.
So :
INTERNET
|
|
|-------(Alone Computer) 192.168.0.2
(ROUTER)
|-------(Alone Computer) 192.168.0.3
|
|
|
(SWITCH)-------- 192.168.1.2
|------------ 192.168.1.3
|------------ 192.168.1.4
Sorry but I still don't understand.
As I wrote - typical router has 2 NIC so it is 2-port device.
How many ports the router has? Is it a multiport device?
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.