Hello Dirk, I think it was too late for me yesterday ... oh, man ! Dirk Schreiner schrieb:
Hi,
ups ;-))
Philipp Rusch schrieb:
Jason, Ok, we are one step further !
To clarify: (this has been defined like that, there is no obvious technical reason for that, ok there are some reasons, but that would lead us too far)
4 Bit CPU and serial communication ;-)
oka, we both know that this masking stuff comes from bitwise decoding from "left to right" and should save cycles in "those early days" .... ;-)
there are classes of IP-networks:
A-class : mask /8 B-class : mask /16 C-class : mask /24
D-Class /32 not to forget (Multicast)
E-Class (but this is Experimental, SCNR)
of course there are others ..., you're right but Jason got my point .... otherwise could read the RFC
which means, these are "unrouteable" adresses in terms of internet routes, that's the reason for NAT, for instance.
OK,
10.a.b.c "normally" has to have a /8 mask (type A class) you can divide this huge network of 16*16*16 hosts in smaller
which some special adresses reserved for "private use",
(256 * 256 * 256) - 2
ehemm, completely brain dead here, you are absolutely right with your calculation !!! how did I come to 16 ????. ip adress in notation a.b.c.d is 8bit.8bit.8bit.8bit = 32 bits adresses in IP v4 ok: number of host in a C class is 256 -2 then B-class is (256*256) -2 then, now we got it.
Now this is good explained:
thank you !
nets using a /16 or a /24 mask for instance.
172.16.m.n "normally" has to have a /16 mask (type B class) but the same concept of breaking it down into parts applies as above, you are free to do so.
192.168.x.y "normally" has to have a /24 mask (type C class) which implies that you choose the "x" and then this part of the network address is fix for your setup.
The advantage of having a 10.a.b.c/8 network instead of a 192.168.x.y/24 is that you can have more hosts belonging to the *same" network without the need to route.
In your case, if you are still free to choose your network adresses and don't have more than 254 hosts, I would strongly recommend that you go for something like 192.168.1.x/24 on eth1 and 192.168.2.y/24 on eth2 or if you have more hosts, go for 172.16.1.x/16 on eth1 if there is the majority of your hosts and take 192.168.2.x/24 for eth2.
Next question: what are the routing entries of your Windows PCs? They have to know about the other net as well !
No, they have to know the Gateway and if the Default-Gw knows they have only to know the default-gw.
ya, ok, I just wanted to say that they must somehow know where to route to, your statement is right, a gw-definition shuould suffice. I always explain this to beginners like that: Internet hosts mst only know their neighbours, which know about their neighbours which know a way to other neighbours and so on. Some of these know more about others and thus have a longer routing table (central routers at an ISP for instance) .... :-)
Post a route print example output of both networks back here.
And as seen, the Firewall is activated. First test Routing with deactivated Firewall. Then activate Firewall. (Remember the OSI - Layers ;-)
Uaah, OSI !!! No, bäh ... But you are right again: should test this setup without firewall first, test routing until it works, then get the rules straight.
Greetings Dirk TRIA IT-consulting GmbH Joseph-Wild-Stra?e 20 81829 Munchen Germany Tel: +49 (89) 92907-0 Fax: +49 (89) 92907-100 http://www.tria.de --------------------------------------------------------
working hard | for your success --------------------------------------------------------
what about your success ? ;-) - - SNIP - - Greetings, Philipp P.S.: I'm interested in talking on privately.