Fedora Servers :: Use Tab Networking In Kvm With Routing?
Mar 3, 2009
I want to use tab networking in my kvm with routing.Can any one guide me how i can do it. i have been reading different guides over the net but not understand any one clearly.I have read this[URL].. One problem is this all my server are remote and no gui is running.I am able to install kvm with ssh console with -nographic and -x "console=ttyS0" option now i want to change from bridging to tap networking with routing.And i have live ip on kvm guest/Virtual machine.
routing tables using "ip route 2" I have a server(server1 from now on) with eth0(internet connection) and eth1(lan connection). eth1 have 2 more alias devices = eth1:1 and eth1:2 On my server 1 the eth0=public ip, on eth1=192.168.10.1/24, eth1:1=192.168.20.1/24 and eth1:2=192.168.30.1/24 server1 is running squid and iptables to all 3 networks (eth1, eth1:1 and eth1:2) All of the clients have access to internet. Now what i want to do is add 3 more networks via a router(linuxBox = server2 from now on) connected to server1 in eth1. so the network will be like this:
Code:
server1 eth0=internet eth1=192.168.10.1/24 (connected to server2 and other clients)
So my server running FC4 died last night and I decided to go ahead with the long-awaited upgrade to FC10 while I was rebuilding my server. I use my server for a number of things including, but not limited to: router, firewall, web server, mail server... I have a typical configuration process that I have followed since before fedora, and it has worked well for me up through FC4, but my usual config process doesn't work on FC10.
First of all, I don't want SELinux running, I didn't see an option to not install it during the FC10 setup, so how to I properly disable or uninstall it afterwards? Second, I was unable to even configure the server to route traffic from my internal network to the web, here's the process I usually go through for this:
[Code]...
I don't have a static IP from my ISP, so I'm not quite sure how to add the default route. I think I need to do something like "route add default gw xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx eth1" where eth1 is my external NIC, correct?
What else do I need to do to route traffic? I noticed that I wasn't even able to ping my server from the internal network even though they are on the same subnet, my server's internal NIC has an address of 192.168.7.1 and my computer on the network has an address of 192.168.7.2. If I can get this going to I have internet access again at the very least, I can move forward with the web server, email, etc.
IN LAN default GW box I have a routing rule of 172.17.1.0 192.168.180.100 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 eth3 that sends packets matching 172.17.1.0/24 to eth3 etc. When I ping 172.17.1.50 - it goes correctly when ping is issued in the same box (LAN GW) - falls through to default rule when the ping is done in LAN's boxes i.e. it goes to the LAN GW box and then to Internet incorrectly instead of going to eth3 and 192.168.180.100.
Is there any way of seeing why the packet matches or not the routing rules?
I have a Pc that has 2 Ethernet and I have also 2 switch. I want the PC to become the router and be connected to 2 switch.How can I setup this one on FEDORA and I want to assigned for eth0 192.168.26.51 and eth1 192.168.22.51 for the IP.
I have just installed Fedora 10 on an old laptop and was quite impressed with how smoothly it all went ... until it came to setting up networking!
I have battled for three days now and I'm almost there; - installed updated firmware to the built in Broadcom 4306 wireless network adapter - got NetworkManager to work with a static ip address by manually editing the ifcfg-wlan0 file - managed to get the WPA security to work
The only problem I am left with is that there is no default route; if I set one up using: ip r a default via 10.1.1.1 dev wlan0
Then everything starts working.
If I try to add routes using the NetworkManager gui interface they dont get saved (no suprises there then! ).
I have tried creating a route-wlan0 file in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ but this seems to be ignored by NetworkManager.
Since the NetworkManager GUI is almost useless, does anyone know if there are any other configuration files I can manually modify to get a default route set?
On a Fedora 11 machine, I configured ppp0 on eth0 and ppp1 on eth1, each one is connected to a modem, I also defined ppp0 as the default gateway.. Should I do anything else to load balance the 2 connections or will ppp1 take some of the load by default? Should I add any other routing rules? If yes then please tell me what should I add, keeping in mind that for each pppoe connection both the pppoe address and the remote address are not static so I actually needed some scripting to change the default gateway each time the remote pppoe address changes.
On the ROUTER I have set the ip_forward=1 and eth0.proxy_arp=1 and eth1.proxy_arp=1 then I run the following command : route add -net 192.168.2.0/24 gw 192.168.2.1 dev eth0 route add -net 192.168.4.0/24 gw 192.168.4.1 dev eth1
On PC1 I executed the following : route add -net 192.168.4.0/24 gw 192.168.2.1 dev eth0 and for PC2 I run the following route add -net 192.168.2.0/24 gw 192.168.4.1 dev eth0
After doing those things, I can't ping between PC1 and PC2... but both can ping the router...
I'm currently reading through the Linux Advanced Routing and Traffic Control HOWTO from lartc.org, and I'm wondering whether anyone knows of a file where I could keep qos rules persistent across a reboot, similar to /etc/sysconfig/iptables for netfilter. Should I just write my own script, or does something already exist? By the way, iproute-2.6.29-4.fc12.i686.
I have a problem with the activation of routing under fedora. The problem lies exactly in the file ip_forward who I didn't not change the value to 1. When I use the command echo 1> / proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward. They appears not granted permission. Knowing that I use the root account.
i have a Server, which has 2 nics installed. Each of those is connected to a router, which is connected to internet. On the server, i have apache, maillserver and im-server running. On the other hand, also squid, dansguardian and clam are running. so now: via eth0 i would like to have just the traffic, which is requested from outside (the big bad internet..) to my server (apache, mail, etc). via eth1 i would like to have all OUTGOING (also to the big bad internet) from the server, which is requested by a internal client. And of course all requests to my own server
both nics shall route their traffic to their own router. For better comprehension please consult the enclosed graph. Until now, i did not find a good solution, the default route is set to the traffic from eth0, if not, no external request will find back to a client do you have a idea how to handle this the easiest way?
I don't know what I'm trying to achieve falls into 'routing' or 'Bridging'???I have two network ports (with static IP ) and I would like to forward RX packets of one to the other.
I have done this in Windows by enabling a service called 'routing'.Is there something similar in Fedora 11? I am pretty sure there are a few thread explaining these but I am just not educated enough to find one that makes sense to me, so Please excuse me for starting a redundant thread and point me to it?
I am having trouble for routing port 80 from a Billion adsl modem to a guest server in VirtualBox. There are quite few different changes from my last setup so I kind of confuse which one is wrong.
I used to use have the setup belowusing modem Linksys WAG354G use static ip 192.168.1.100 for my machine use static ip 192.168.1.102 for my guest VirtualBox server guest OS is serving http listening on port 80 i use bridge from my host OS for VirtualBox set my modem to direct all traffic on port 80 to 192.168.1.102 host OS was Fedora 11
now I useusing modem Billion 7404VNPX use same static address and configuration host OS is Fedora 13
main issue is I cannot reach the guest OS if I navigate to my modem ip address. (e.g. http://192.168.1.1) if I change the modem to direct all traffic to my host OS ip address (192.168.1.100) it works nicely.
I have tried to disable and enable the firewall without any luck.
I have an Ubuntu 9.10 server installation which have been working flawlessly for some months. The server runs bridged networking, because of some VMs that runs on it. But, a couple of weeks ago the network connectivity have started to disappear now and then (usually once a day or so). Running "sudo /etc/init.d/networking restart" always kicks it back to life.
After a bit of debugging I noticed that when OK the routing table looked like this: Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 br0 192.168.122.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 virbr0 default 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 br0
While when in the non-working state it looked like this: Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 br0 192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 192.168.122.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 virbr0 default 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 eth0 default 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 0 0 br0
Deleting the two routes to eth0 restores the networking again. Why these "erronous" routes gets added, and what adds them? How to further debug this?
I have one external ip address and a few domains. Would it be possible to have each domain on a internal domain and the box that sits on that external ip route to the internal. This would be for a number of server (mail, apache, imap, pop3, https ) So for example:
Some visit domain1.com ->external ip -> 192.168.10.100 Someone else visit domain2.com ->external ip -> 192.168.10.101 and so one with a number of domains
I have an environment of roughly 30 machines that all have ssmtp installed with identical config files. I also have logwatch installed on all of them, and it runs nightly as it is supposed to. The problem is that any given night, a random number of machines do not send out the resulting email from logwatch but instead dump it to ~/dead.letter. The number of failures changes every night, but most of the time it is between 20 and 30 of my servers.
Just curious to see what everyone's opinion on using routing vs. bridging for openVPN. I'm installing openVPN on a linux box that I'm using as a router. What I was wondering was your opinions on which one of these two options to use.
I am playing with openvpn, and I got stuck.I am using ubuntu server for openvpn server, which has 2 physical NICs, one is directly on internet and other is LAN, where few pcs are connected on.
As far as I can tell, the server guides only explain a bit about what dynamic routing is, but not how to implement it.
My situation is this:
We require a server with 3 interfaces. One local, one to a vsat link and the other to a fibre link. The fibre will be the default route for Internet traffic but we want dynamic routing to automatically switch to the vsat link when the fibre link goes down (which happens fairly often in Zimbabwe!) and then switch back to the fibre link when it comes back up again.
The first option would be to handle dynamic routing on a Cisco router, but at the prices of Cisco devices here, it's not the most affordable option.
i know exactly what i need to do, im just not familiar enough with command line to do it properly.i have 7 computers.the first 4 are connected to a router via wireless at one end of the house. of the last 3 only 1 will be able to access the router via wireless, so it needs to share it's one wireless connection via ethernet. this computer i'm going to call 'server'server will have two IP'swlan0 192.168.1.6 this connects to the router that has internet access.eth0 i intend to have the following settingsip:192.168.0.1sub: 255.255.0eth0 will connect to a second router, where the cat5 cable goes from the server, into the internet port of the router where i will define the router's static IP:IP: 192.168.0.100sub: 255.255.255.0gateway 192.168.0.1i have then set the router IP for LAN handling as 192.168.27.1 and all ethernet connections will have a 192.168.27.x IP.
so i need to know how to, without a gui application, use the terminal to assign server eth0 a proper IP address, and tell the server to take the connection it has and share it through eth0 to supply internet for the last 2 computers via ethernet.i had it set up in this way with a windows machine being the one that had the wifi access, but i'd rather have it setup for the ubuntu server to do this task. security is imperative for these 3 remaining machines, so just getting 2 more wifi adapters for a connection to the initial router isn't an option.the 2 that connect to server do so through SSH and though server IS connected via wireless it only makes outward connections through
My setup is...I have a wireless access point using laptop as a gateway. The AP is also connected to a switch as is the laptop. So the laptop has two interfaces one wireless and one wired. A third device is using the AP to connect to a server on the internet. The AP sends the packets to my laptop where they are dropped. I've been looking for a solution to this problem without success. Basically is there a way for my laptop to forward all packets it sees from a certain IP address to whatever destination address they have?To clarify, my laptop is just the gateway of the AP and none of the packets are addressed to it at all, it just picks them up using a sniffer or similar tool.
I have a pc with debian 6 (without GUI) installed on it and want to use it as server at home. It has 2 ethernet nics. Now i want to configure the routing process. Searched internet for a long time found something but couldn't get it work.
When setting up an SSH proxy, I know you can configure Firefox to route DNS requests through the proxy. Is this possible from linux directly? I'm trying to use wget through the proxy, including DNS lookups.
I have two subnets which I am interested in connecting.
Some basic network details:
Subnet A:
Subnet B:
I am trying to think of any further relevant details, but that seems to be it to me. If I forgot anything, please tell me.
Ok the question. WHAT do I type? (Explicitly!) And WHERE do I type it? In order to reach ubuntu-01.tec.lan, or ubuntu-02.tec.lan from perpetrator.tec.lan or rapine.tec.lan?
I'm interested in using actuall ROUTES. I can already achieve results similair to this with either a NAT firewall, or with VPN.. but that's not what I am interested in.
From what I have found out so far, I should need something like the following:
I'm newbie to Wireless. Currently I try to implement EAP-TLS but firstly I need to get the hardware work, allow Access Point to Route from Wireless to Wire (LAN DNS server).
I have a network routing problem that I need to fix using a PC with ubuntu installed.
Here are the details of my problem: - I have two networks. - The first network is an ADSL router with subnet 192.168.1.x. I do not have access to the router nor change any of its configuration. - The second network has a subnet 172.26.x.x and connect via a wireless access point. Some of the devices connected to the network require to have static IPs. - I have a PC with ubuntu installed and two ethernet cards: one connected to the first network and the other connected to the access point. - I need to share the internet connection between the two networks using ubuntu. I already tried before on windows and the sharing worked when both networks were configured to use the same subnet. Once I changed the subnet of the second network, internet sharing stopped working.
Im having a issue with routing internet traffic from my router two different subnets (vlans).
Theres my setup:-
Server:
Both eth0,1 are running dhcp (two scoopes) that works fine!
The output of route -n is:
I have ip_forwarding on aswell, but i can ping the ip on the server running that dhcp scoope ie ping 192.168.4.1 works great but i just cant get the internet on the clients.
I have two linux boxes running RHEL 5.5 with internal ip addresses 10.0.0.114/24 and 10.0.0.118/24, and usual gateway 10.0.0.1. There's an apache listening on both ports 80 and 443 for several websites. This works nice, but the feature for load balancing has to be added. For this, externally, but in the same subnet, a hardware device has been placed for load balancing (we call it "F5"), with internal ip 10.0.0.152 (vrrp for 10.0.0.153 and 10.0.0.154). There's a service address that does NAT via round robin to the servers, 10.0.0.208, managed by the F5 balancer.
If I set as gateway the ip 10.0.0.152 in both nodes, I can use the service address for browsing http and https, *BUT* at a cost that ssh and any other connections, at OS logging level, come from 10.0.0.1, which is innaceptable (i.e., I can' set proper security, regardless the F5 is badly configured), so I have to find another way for this. So, I thought of using iptables mangling capabilities, and my thought is that just changing the default route of the incoming http(s) traffic, everything should be ok. I've done the following:
If I tweak the hosts file in my M$ workstation to test individual access for each server, I can browse the websites with no problem, but if I set the service IP address, I get an error "Document contains no data" in the browser after just a few seconds. Apache logs show nothing in its logs. I can see packets arriving, but seem to go in a loop. I can provide some output, but since surely I'm making some mistake in the process, if I get help with the proper knoweledge about how to fix it, the problem will be solved. But if still someone needs it, I can provide more data.
