This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[atlas] RIPE atlas probe network configuration
- Previous message (by thread): [atlas] RIPE atlas probe network configuration
- Next message (by thread): [atlas] Fwd: Your RIPE Atlas Probe (ID: 11513) is now connected to our network
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Philip Homburg
philip.homburg at ripe.net
Tue Oct 21 11:32:17 CEST 2014
On 2014/10/20 20:55 , James A. T. Rice wrote: > I don't think using the right source address should be difficult - > http://linux-ip.net/html/routing-saddr-selection.html > "the kernel will use the src hint from the chosen route path" Yes, that might work. I would almost say: just insert a NAT box between the router and the probe. :-) >> So for Atlas, it would be best if the probe could be configured as >> p.q.r.0/24 with p.q.r.1 as the gateway. Leaving the whole 10.a.b out of >> the story. > > That does bring back memories of moving customers off of a shared VLAN and a /23 onto their own VLAN and /28. Those that didn't renumber in a timely fashion had a VLAN with proxy-arp enabled, and a static arp entry for their mac address to their new (yet configured on their host) IP, and a static route for the old IP address to the new IP address. > > I guess on my side I could assign a subnet of private space, make a static arp entry to your real mac address for a chosen IP from the private range, and then make a static route /32 for your public IP towards the private IP. The sensible netmask to use would be the /19 or /22 or whatever our allocated block is (otherwise the probe wouldn't be able to reach the IPs it thinks are its network and broadcast addresses. I shall give this a try. > > Can you think of any problems this might make? What's the limit of the arp table size on the probe for instance? I don't know if there is a BCP for this, but I would suspect that allocating one VLAN per host would be best. The provides complete isolation. Then, if you tell the host it is on a /24 or bigger, the router would have to proxy-arp for the other hosts on the same subnet. But the probe has no business of talking to those hosts. For the ARP cache, if it works for a normal Linux hosts, then I suspect it will work for a v3 probe as well. Philip
- Previous message (by thread): [atlas] RIPE atlas probe network configuration
- Next message (by thread): [atlas] Fwd: Your RIPE Atlas Probe (ID: 11513) is now connected to our network
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]