I also would appreciate to see a real solution
here from Lucent. You have to setup different filters
on all portmasters so that a filter only covers
the ip pool range of the portmaster that filter is
installed on.
Christian
At 12:18 AM 4/29/99 , you wrote:
>
>Rick Kunze wrote:
>>
>>[...] What is happening, is that if
>>the dial-up user drops connection, the PM3 forwards the inbound stream to
>>the main router which in turn, forwards it back to the PM3 and so on, till
>>it runs out of lives so to speak.
>>
>>Should not the PM3 show the IP address as not available? If I ping an
>>address in the PM3 pool (one that is NOT currently in use) from within my
>>network I get an "Expired in transit" reply from the IP address of the PM3
>>itself!
>>
>>Is this correct?
>
>
>This has been discussed before, check the list archives. Some representative
>articles are:
>
> http://www.livingston.com/tech/archive/portmaster-users/9802/1459.html
> http://www.livingston.com/tech/archive/portmaster-users/9801/1481.html
>
>Bottom line --- quite a few people have complained about it, but so far
>Lucent (and Livingston before them) has shown no interest in changing
>this behaviour in ComOS. Instead, their answer is that you should
>create a filter on the ethernet port so that outbound traffic is
>dropped if the destination is an address within your assigned pool.
>As a simple example, if you have an assigned address of 192.168.1.128,
>and a pool size of 48, you could do the following:
>
> add filter ether.out
>
> set filter ether.out 1 deny 0.0.0.0/0 192.168.1.128/27
> set filter ether.out 2 deny 0.0.0.0/0 192.168.1.160/28
> set filter ether.out 3 permit 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0
>
> set ether0 ofilter ether.out
>
> save all
>
>Rule 1 stops bounced packets for the first 32 addresses
>in the pool, rule 2 stops bounced packets for the next 16.
>If you have other filtering needs for the ethernet interface,
>you could incorporate the above into that filter.
>
>
>I still think Lucent should change ComOS so that it returns
>an appropriate ICMP message when this happens. This issue
>comes up on a regular basis, and although it -can- be worked
>around with an appropriate filter, there are obviously a lot
>of people who don't know about this until they notice it
>causing problems and investigate it.
>
>What is the best/preferred way to officially request a ComOS
>RFE from Lucent?
>
>
>Michael Bryan
>pmu@ursine.com
>
>-
>To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
>'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
>Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>
>
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>