Re: [squid-users] Help! one more time on on Squid3.HEAD(20110307), TPROXY4 and Iptables 1.4.9 + ebtables

On 20/03/11 06:38, Jim Binder wrote:
> Think I finally figured it out... It was internal routing as I had expected. Remember, eth0 (inside), eth1(admin), eth2(inet)...
>
> The issue was that i had two interfaces on the same network 192.168.1.x... (br0 and eth1) One being the bridge (br0) and the other being the Admin interface I was using (addr. via DHCP). Because the it was the first entry in the route table to the network, linux wasn't sending packets from squid into the bridge.
>

Great catch!

> This works:
>
> 192.168.1.0/24 dev br0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.1.88
> 192.168.1.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.1.91
> default via 192.168.1.254 dev eth1
> default via 192.168.1.254 dev br0
>
> This doesn't:
>
> 192.168.1.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.1.91
> 192.168.1.0/24 dev br0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.1.88
> default via 192.168.1.254 dev br0
> default via 192.168.1.254 dev eth1
>
> My simple solution was to release the ip addr of eth1 (dhcp -r eth1) and then assign dhcp to br0 and then re-dhcp eth1.
>
> Have to think about if I can craft a policy to do the right thing regardless of order without having to release eth1. Till then it works fine.
>

Setting a high metric for the eth1 should do it. Though I'm not sure how
one achieves that on DHCP assignment.

> You might want to update the twiki
>

Updated. Thank you for the details. Does this look right?
http://wiki.squid-cache.org/Features/Tproxy4#Timeouts_with_Squid_running_as_a_bridge_or_multiple-NIC

Amos

-- 
Please be using
   Current Stable Squid 2.7.STABLE9 or 3.1.11
   Beta testers wanted for 3.2.0.5