2013-03-20 - Re: [GRASE-Hotspot] two networks on the internal network adaptor?

Header Data

From: Psteve <ps***k@yahoo.com>
Message Hash: 039ad788fa93edf57b763b01bdd0c14898197f37120a89b8d4094ee5f11d9240
Message ID: <1363815595.53908.YahooMailNeo@web140604.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Reply To: <513E916D.2030501@gmail.com>
UTC Datetime: 2013-03-20 14:39:55 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 14:39:55 -0700

Raw message 

Hi Tim (et al)

I did reply to this but the attachment I included was too big and had to be approved by an administrator?  So I'll try with ASCII

(R) = router
(S) = switch
[G] = grase server
[PC] = PC

(internet)-----[G]----(S1)----(R)----(S2)----[PC2]
                       |
                     [PC1]

hopefully that worked out.  If not, PC1 should be connected to S1!

PC1 (10.1.0.20) has a default gateway of R (10.1.0.254), overriding the gateway given by DHCP
PC2 (10.1.1.20) has a default gateway of R (10.1.1.254), DHCP handed out by R

R knows about network 1, network 2 and also a default route out to the internet via 10.1.0.1 (grase).

Forgetting what I've done with PC1 for now as in 'normal' circumstances, the default gateway is left to DHCP as I don't actually care about PC2 seeing PC1, I just set that up to prove the connectivity through R.  What I'm mainly interested in getting working is PC2.

I'm guessing Grase must act as a router somewhere and in it's table it needs to have "network 10.1.1.0 255.255.255.0 gateway 10.1.0.254".  However, I suspect there is much more to it than that, it's just my inexperience of ubuntu has left me dry.

I hope that makes sense.

Like I said, I did try adding the network to the ubunutu local routing table on grase but it didn't seem to make any difference.

The only way I can get this setup working for now is to enable natting on R so that traffic from PC2 appears to grase to be coming from 10.1.0.254, then enable a machine account for the mac address of R.  However, this isn't ideal as there is more than just 1 PC where PC2 is, and grase's lovely reporting features stop producing such meaningful results.

I'd be much obliged if there's anything you can do to assist.

Thanks
Steve



>________________________________
> From: Tim White <ti***8@gmail.com>
>To: GRASE Hotspot General Discussions <gr***t@lists.sourceforge.net> 
>Sent: Tuesday, 12 March 2013, 2:22
>Subject: Re: [GRASE-Hotspot] two networks on the internal network adaptor?
> 
>
>On 10/03/13 02:44, Psteve wrote:
>
>Hello All
>> 
>>I'm sure this is a really simple thing to do but I just can't figure out how to do it.  I've been running grase for some time now really sucessfully at the company I work for (an emergency service).  So sucessful that I've had a request to put it in on another site.  The two sites are linked together.  Let's say siteA is 10.1.0.X and siteB is 10.1.1.X.  The routers internally are 10.1.0.254 and 10.1.1.254.  Network traffic passes between them just fine, although computers on site B can't ping the grase server, although they can ping other PCs on siteA.
>> 
>>I suspect this is something to do with the internal routing table in ubuntu but I've added a route into the grase server for 10.1.1.0 with a gateway of 10.1.0.254 and it still doesn't seem to want to play.
>> 
>>Has anyone achieved this?
>Maybe some more details as to how it is setup.
>
>In a normal Grase setup, Grase handles the DHCP for the network. It
    sounds to me as if you have the Grase server (say 10.1.0.1) at Site
    A, and it's the default gateway for the Site A network, and handles
    DHCP for the Site A network? Then you have a router at Site A that
    is somehow connected to Site B (assuming a PTP like?). Site B
    doesn't have an "internet" connection, just the connection to Router
    A at Site A.
>
>What I don't get about this setup, which probably means I
    misunderstood your setup, is how do the Site A client computers know
    how to connect to the Site B client computers. Unless they all have
    static routes in them pointing them to the 10.1.0.254 router for
    10.1.1.0, they'll be trying to use 10.1.0.1 as the route for all
    unknown networks. Adding static routes to lots of computers is silly
    and annoying.
>
>
>Maybe a digram of how it's all connected, and what routes are in
    place (including default routes) and what the links are, would help.
    It also sounds like you probably need Grase setup in Layer 3
    routing, not Layer 2, and so it wouldn't be handling DHCP, just
    captive portal.
>
>Tim
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
>Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
>endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to 
>tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. 
>http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
>_______________________________________________
>Grase-hotspot mailing list
>Gr***t@lists.sourceforge.net
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/grase-hotspot
>
>
>

Thread