From: Mario Strasser (mario.strasser_at_zhwin.ch)
Date: Fri Sep 06 2002 - 09:02:42 CEST
Hi,
On Friday 06 September 2002 04:17, John A. Sullivan III wrote:
> [skip]
> I felt a little uncomfortable with the subnet definition of 0.0.0.0
> netmask 0.0.0.0. I know that iptables should keep me safe but I still
> didn't like it.
I don't like it either ;-)
> Instead, I tried using the shared network feature. I
> gather this feature is designed for multiple subnets on the same network
> media. It appears to allow dhcpd to respond to requests for addresses
> for which it does not have an interface. I used this feature to say
> that there was a "virtual" network on the loopback interface.
Well, it looks like your solution is just bether than mine. I'll try to verify
it as soon as I can and would be glad if some others could do it too.
If everything work fine, I'll include a 'shared network' based configuration
in the next release of the HOWTO. Thanks John!
Regards
Mario
Content Security by MailMarshal
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users_at_lists.freeswan.org
http://lists.freeswan.org/mailman/listinfo/users
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 05:20:00 CEST