[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  "Mitch \(WebCob\)" <mitch at webcob dot com>
 To:  hhamel at privalodc dot com
 Cc:  m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall] Re: ATM WAS RE: [m0n0wall] RE : [m0n0wall] Traffic Shaping issue
 Date:  Tue, 27 Jul 2004 15:12:58 -0700
Hmmm not quite... ;-)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: hhamel at privalodc dot com [mailto:hhamel at privalodc dot com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 2:36 PM
> To: Mitch (WebCob)
> Cc: Hugo Hamel; m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
> Subject: [m0n0wall] Re: ATM WAS RE: [m0n0wall] RE : [m0n0wall] Traffic
> Shaping issue
> Your ISP is buying Bandwith from a carrier. This is an ATM circuit
> connecting back to the carrier. This is a layer 2 conection (OSI model).
> It is connected to his router for the layer 3 connection. You are
> connecting to his DSLAM (equipement that provides you your DSL connection)
> this is a layer 2 connection (most of the time, this is a PPoE connection)

Ok, we aren't using PPoE, it is a "bridged" connection - their word, not
mine, but I simply configure an ethernet device for the assigned IP and go.
It is a public routable IP, but to provide a better example:

Network: xxx.113.195.0/25
ISP Router: xxx.113.195.1
Subscriber A: xxx.113.195.23
Subscriber B: xxx.113.195.24

At present, Subscriber A CAN NOT see subscriber B. I will be replacing ISP
router with my own, and want / need to change that. The reason being, IPSec
tunnels from Subscriber A to subscriber B are not possible with FreeBSD (I
am looking at openvpn as an alternative).

> /32 subnetting is mostly use for point to point connection between 2 sites
> using private line or frame relay.

Essentially this is what I have. The way the ATM is used to transport the
data, it acts as a private line. The ISP router expects the clients to be
able to communicate directly (as they are on the same subnet) so it does NOT
route (not even sure FreeBSD CAN route on the same interface).

Thanks for the comments - does this make my problem clearer?