RFC on solution to Rejean's situation

Luke Davis ldavis at shellworld.net
Sun Nov 2 01:33:16 EST 2003

To clarify: are you suggesting that the ADSL modem interface, be installed
in the existing Linux machine, thus giving it three interfaces: one to the
Windows network, and two to the net, with the Windows network having no
net interfaces of its own?

I see two potential downsides with this:

1.  If the Linux machine ever goes down for any reason, the Windows
network is totally cut off from the internet.

2.  In addition to its heavy load in mail, apache, MYSQL, Samba, mailing
list management, FTP, and other things, for many meg (to gig, if you count
samba) of data per day, it now also has the load of serving as security
guard, and traffic cop, for the entire network.
Is this really a good thing?


 On Sat, 1 Nov 2003, John covici wrote:

> I think the firewall stuff can be done on the same machine -- no need
> for another box at all.  There are several ways to route the packets
> from the windows system out a certain interface and you will need to
> use iptables heavily along with the ip command to accomplish some of
> this.
> One way which comes to mind off the top of my head is that you can
> use the mangle table of iptables and put a statement in the
> PREROUTING chain to mark the packets with 1 and then have a rule in
> the policy database to send all such packets out the interface
> desired.
> In addition the the ip tables unreliable guide from Rusty Russell and
> the manpage, the ip command has an example in chapter 4 of its
> documentation as to how to work with two interfaces, so this should
> work fine.
> You can tell samba to only listen on a certain interface, so that
> problem should be easily solved.
> Hope this helps.

More information about the Speakup mailing list