Re: using common topology through captive portal

[email protected]
Newsgroups gmane.comp.security.firewalls.m0n0wall
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Mike,

here are the results of a MAC-Passing-through

IP address  	MAC address  	Session start  	Download  	Upload  	Username
192.168.x.15 	00:zz:yy:xx:tt:fe  	10/23/2009 02:41:19 	170.40 MB  
	26.89 MB 	unauthenticated  	disconnect client

As You can see, there would be NO AUTHENTICATION than the MAC-Adress.  
But since the MAC of this host ist passed through there would in fact  
be NO USER AUthentication ONLY MAC!!!

So I think, this would not complain Your exigences...;-)

Any way please post the results of Your experiences - So there would  
be some facts in the "Database" of the mailing-List...

Ralf

Zitat von Mike Nichols <[email protected]>:

>
>
> Though i plan to try this out late tonight, i was hoping to get some
> feedback on it beforehand.
>
> i plan to connect two offices through use of physical connections that
> must include the captive portal. What i mean is that the only way to
> connect the two locations is use of infrastructure that is using the
> captive portal. so i'm thinking of just applying pass rules and setting
> static IPs on those machines corresponding to the network outside the
> captive portal. My question is this, when using the pass through mac, what
> is actually happening? is it just routing the traffic around the portal?
> Will the packets make it through the portal, through the pass rules and act
> as usual (probably without multicast)?
>
> let me know if anyone wants a report back on this.
> --
>  Mike Nichols
>  +1 914 613 3334
>  [email protected]
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.