[KLUG Members] Quick openBSD question

[Patrick Stockton]

Why wouldn't you be using NAT?

In my expierance you generally have two ethernet interfaces /dev/eth0 and
/dev/eth1.

example:
/dev/eth0 would be your cable/dsl/etc connection and have a public real IP
address
/dev/eth1 would be your private internal connection and have something along
the lines of a 192.168.1.0 IP address (class C no routable)

NAT does the address translation between your private network and the public
network.

When you use the route command on your firewall box setting the default
gateway as the gateway of your ISP sets device to eth0


This is the way I've always done it.
If anyone knows a better way of doing this I would be interested in hearing
it.

----- Original Message -----
From: <Adam_Bultman@gmx.net>
To: <members@kalamazoolinux.org>
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 8:58 AM
Subject: [KLUG Members] Quick openBSD question


> Okay, here's the deal:
>
> I'm building an openBSD firewall for work.  It has to allow traffic in,
and
> out, obviously, to live Internet IP's.
>
> My problem: It's using the wrong interface to route packets, and I can't
get
> the route command to take an interface name to use when routing.
>
> I can't find anything on the internet that tells me how, since I'm not
using
> NAT...
>
>
> adam
>
> --
> Adam Bultman
>
> adam_bultman@bigfoot.com
>
> Sent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members@kalamazoolinux.org
>