>1)  Do the m0n0walls have default gateway entries?  if so, what are
>they?

The Default Gateway for m0n0#1 is the WAN of m0n0#2 and vice versa

Why say it's not a pretty setup? Do you have a better suggestion for allowing server#1 to connect to
Server#2 and appear to be coming from 192.168.22.1? :-)

Thanks for the reply I'll try what you have suggested. :-)




Chris Buechler wrote:

>On 11/30/05, Mark Wass <mark dot wass at market dash analyst dot com> wrote:
>  
>
>> Sorry Chris, that was a question. Not a statement
>>
>>    
>>
>
>Well, mine was a statement and a question at the same time.  :) 
>Should have read "yes.  Did you disable NAT?"
>
>
>
>  
>
>> Can I route these private subnets. Take a look at my original email and
>>you'll see what I want to do :-)
>>
>>    
>>
>
>yeah, i missed the earlier part of this thread.  Is it possible? 
>Yeah.  pretty?  absolutely not.  But if you absolutely must set it up
>this way...
>
>1)  Do the m0n0walls have default gateway entries?  if so, what are
>they?  if you're just routing these private subnets, they aren't
>required, but whether or not they're defined and what they're defined
>as could have some impact.
>2)  as depicted in that diagram, the static route on m0n0wall #2 needs
>to be on the WAN interface, not LAN as you showed (unless that was a
>typo).  m0n0 #2 may also need a route on the WAN to 192.168.100.0/24,
>depending on the answer to the above.
>3)  I'd enable outbound NAT on both of them to completely disable NAT
>(no rules at all), then I'd probably do a 1:1 mapping between a
>192.168.22. IP and server 1's 192.168.3. IP, and add proxy arp on that
>.22. IP too.  From there, as long as the proper firewall rules are in
>place, everything should work.
>
>-Chris
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
>For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
>
>
>
>  
>