[ale] Firewall design

[Stuffed Crust]

On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 10:19:44PM -0400, Christopher Fowler wrote:
> What ever I do my plan is to create the firewall as a bridging firewall
> with _no_ address.  The only access will be via serial console.  We'll
> install a console management device at the remote site so I will have to
> access it first remotely before I can connect to the console on the
> firewall to config or make changes.

This limits its effectiveness somewhat, as you'll be forced to use 
ebtables instead of iptables, which has a much smaller functionality 
set.  This is because when bridging the IP traffic never actually hits 
the interfaces, thus the standard INPUT/FORWARD/OUTPUT rules never 
apply.  And NAT will certianly have to be handled by another machine; 
one with actual IP addresses configured.

Is there any reason you don't do the following:

ISP ---- [ NID box ] ------ SERVER1 [nat] --- INTERNAL network
                       |--- SERVER2  
                       |--- SERVER3
		       |--- SERVER4
                       |----SERVER5

Granted, this way you end up needing to configure firewalls on each 
machine.  You could [transparently] insert your bridge firewall machine 
after the NID box much like you need a hub or switch there anyway.

The above illustration is how I have things set up at work, and if 
bright house networks didn't want $80/month more for multiple IPs, at 
home as well.  Each SERVER has its own firewall configured, and SERVER1 
does NAT for the internal private network.

 - Pizza
-- 
Solomon Peachy        				 ICQ: 1318344
Melbourne, FL 					 JID: pitha at myjabber.net
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available