Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | RE: Newbie question... Firewalls vs cisco routers - Proxy arp versus directly connected networks... |
|---|---|
| Date: | Tue, 12 Jul 2005 18:01:41 -0400 |
I would say no, it should be shown up as a network, like dst net is 172.16.0.20 next hop is 192.168.0.20. -----Original Message----- From: Mollemans, Bart [mailto:bart.mollemans@getronics.com] Sent: July 12, 2005 2:44 AM To: Robert Synak; chip; firewalls@securityfocus.com Subject: RE: Newbie question... Firewalls vs cisco routers - Proxy arp versus directly connected networks... Thank you all for your feedback... One quick addition. In this scenario: Interface FastEthernet 0/1 ip address 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0 And on your fw: 192.168.0.20 255.255.255.0 I understand that if on your cisco you do a "sh ip route 192.168.0.20" the host will show up as directly connected. But (here come the tricky part :) ) when my FW proxy arps for a host 172.16.0.20 255.255.255.0, my question is when I look on my cisco "sh ip route 172.16.0.20" shouldn't the 172.16.0.20 host (or /c network for that matter) show up as directly connected also?? I humbly bow in gratitude. Bart -----Original Message----- From: Robert Synak [mailto:robert.synak@anitian.com] Sent: maandag 11 juli 2005 19:30 To: chip; firewalls@securityfocus.com Subject: RE: Newbie question... Firewalls vs cisco routers - Proxy arp versus directly connected networks... Not a bad question for a newbie question. Just to add to what Chip wrote: even if there is an intervening switch or two between the router in question and the host in question, if the host is on the same net, and there's no router between it and the router in question, it is still on a directly connected network. __________________________________________________________ Robert Synak, CISSP, CCNA, SCSA, MCSE, JNCIA-FW Security Engineer ANITIAN ENTERPRISE SECURITY 3800 SW Cedar Hills Blvd, Suite 280 Beaverton, OR 97005 503-644-5656 Office 503-214-8069 Fax 503-807-4429 Mobile www.anitian.com __________________________________________________________ -----Original Message----- From: chip [mailto:chip.gwyn@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 9:07 AM To: firewalls@securityfocus.com Cc: bart.mollemans@getronics.com Subject: Re: Newbie question... Firewalls vs cisco routers - Proxy arp versus directly connected networks... On 7/8/05, Mollemans, Bart <bart.mollemans@getronics.com> wrote:
All,
My question boils down to the following:
When is a host or network directly connected for a cisco router?
Is this when: A the cisco sees a MAC/IP address on his interface?
or B when the host/network matches the network(s)
defined on
the interface of the cisco?
or C both above
or D none above... :)
Thanks for anny input you could give.
Regards,
Bart Mollemans
Let's say everything was just turned on, no arp table exists yet. Now when the router attempts to talk to a host (192.168.0.10) it will first send out an ARP request to the broadcast address of the network. If your network is 192.168.0.0/24 then the request is sent to 192.168.0.255 (the broadcast). The arp request is sent to all hosts on the network segment asking who is responsible for talking for 192.168.0.10. The host with the IP address 192.168.0.10 responds back to the router with it's MAC address saying that it is resonsibile for that IP. The router then knows the MAC address and can then talk back and forth to that host. So, to answer your question. The host and the router have to sit on the same segment and have to have IP addresses within the same network to be able to talk with each other. In the case of Proxy arp a host between the router and the actual host you are wanting to talk with plays middle man and passes traffic back and forth. The middleman host usually being a firewall of some sort. --chip -- Just my $.02, your mileage may vary, batteries not included, etc.... --------------------------------------------------------------------- This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | FW: Remotely Installing a Firewall via TSC - Help!, Aaron Thomas |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: Newbie question... Firewalls vs cisco routers - Proxy arp versus directly connected networks..., David Gillett |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: Newbie question... Firewalls vs cisco routers - Proxy arp versus directly connected networks..., David Gillett |
| Next by Thread: | VPN ERROR - PROTOCOL ID 0, Hesperia DOS- IT Security |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |