cable modem --> Linux "nas" --> dumb switch --> all 1G NICs DHCP (192.168.1.1 etc..)
Linux "nas" --> a single 10G NIC DHCP [or manual] (192.168.5.1 etc..)
Linux "nas" --> a single 10G NIC DHCP (192.168.5.20 etc..)
But I’m having a bear of a time just getting the part where dnsmasq assigns the IPs to the 10G network (192.168.5.1 etc…) working right. I’m assuming that dnsmasq will be the correct tool for the job given the eventual goal but i’m open to whatever get’s the current job done.
Given that, the NAS server / router will be both 192.168.1.1 [nas-cmd] AND 192.168.5.1 [nas] depending on whether it’s enp4s0 or enp5s0 respectively [3 different NICs eventually]. That is how I imagined it with the cable modem being whatever network that is assigned to it on enp6s0 at 100 Base-T.
At present, enp4s0, enp5s0 has been implemented and works fine given that I hardcode the IPs in place for enp5s0 (192.168.5.1, 192.168.5.20) – along with ZFS and samba which shouldn’t matter.
Any help is appreciated, I’ve given it several days worth of trying and I still don’t have a config that works and assigns DHCP range for both networks and passes off a LAN for the NAT to use later.
We can baby-step this anyway you want using no NAT and just enp4s0 standing in for the Internet … to the full Monty with 3 NICs. I just need some help here.
You should post your dnsmasq config file and the network configuration for the NAS box, otherwise it’s going to be hard to guess what’s wrong with it.
You need a static IP address on every interface that you’re going to be serving DHCP from.
Also, unless you specifically want some isolation between the 1G and 10G hosts, you have the option to bridge the interfaces together so you only need one subnet, one static IP on the NAS, and one DHCP address pool.
It seems that dnsmasq and ics have a conflict. I’m still working out the details, but it seems there is at least one conflict. At such time, i’m kinda giving up on the “easy” way to do it and just “brute forcing” it into submission with ics.
It doesn’t matter which conf I invent, the answer is still that I have failed. After many hundreds of configs, the end result is that it still refuses to start with anything but the simplest config.
Instead, the ics method is tedious but it works. I’m annoyed but there is a path that works so far.
But thanks for your response I’ll post when I have something that actually works.
The idea that the 10G and another network be the SAME network is interesting even though in my case, it’s a different network physically. I’ll have to give that some thought.
It shouldn’t be an issue, it’s the firewall which will slow it down but that is dependant more on packets per second and not bandwidth, so on a local network with a small number of users, for connecting to a NAS I wouldn’t think it would be an issue.
@Dexter_Kane I wasn’t sure @ThisOldMan problem was Pfsense just being Pfsense, but I did read somewhere while Pfsense can handle traffic over 1 gigabits it can’t handle 10-gigabit traffic very well, at least not yet. I just misunderstood what problem @ThisOldMan was having with Pfsense.
@ThisOldMan hasn’t mentioned pfSense at all in this thread; he’s using a Linux box as a router, so I’m not sure about the relevance of pfSense to this topic.
I just reread the opening post to this thread, you are right . I confused this post with a different post on a different forum. Just goes to show you shouldn’t e reading posts from different forum at the same time.
I have ICS with Bind9 working now, It’s less elegant than Dnsmasq which does both (rather well) but it works now. Odd that Dnsmasq misbehaves, but the work is done now. I’d include all the configs but its pretty standard stuff except the firewall.