<< | Thread Index | >> ]    [ << | Date Index | >> ]

Subject: Re: suggestions, connecting 2 inconvenient hosts
From: Karl Kleinpaste <karl,AT,charcoal,DOT,com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 20:35:12 +0200
In-reply-to: <9097D3905570D111947E00207810DFE174ABD2@WINTRIX.thermeon.com>

SBNelson,AT,thermeon,DOT,com writes:
> In your case, 2 would tell 3 what it's IP address is, and everything should
> be fine.

I appreciate the suggestion, but the problem is precisely that 3,
being behind an ipmasq gateway, can't be told anything by something
beyond the gateway.

But that's OK, you've inspired me to look into a twisted solution I
was told about once before: Managing a rendezvous protocol by
scribbling a file in AFS, to which all these systems have access, when
a link comes up.

I'll still have to kill & restart ciped-cb on 3, though.  Ohwell.

On an unrelated issue, as a sort of proof of concept, I am currently
doing ipmasq-behind-CIPE-behind-ipmasq, where neighbor systems of 3
are ipmasq'd behind it through its Cipe interface which is then
ipmasq'd again behind the company gateway so as to be part of the
network environment of 1.

<< | Thread Index | >> ]    [ << | Date Index | >> ]