Re: using common topology through captive portal
| 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] >