RARE user and assistance email list

[mc36 <>]

okkk

On 8/26/22 05:56, Gabriel Tetzner wrote:
> Hi Csaba,
>
> I'm sorry for the delay, I was moving around a lot, but I'll ping.
>
> Em qua., 24 de ago. de 2022   s 15:18, mc36 < <>> 
> escreveu:
>
>     the short answer is yes,
>     isolate the underlay and the overlay vrfs (tun vrf, vrf for)
>     pick a routing protocol and red conn everywhere
>     you'll end up with an equal rib in all the boxes,
>     that is, sho ipv4 rou v1 will be the same in the overlay everywhere
>     that is, all the nodes will know where to send the packets in the overlay 
> while isolating it completely it from the underlay...
>
>     but please help me a bit and mimic that you haven't got the answer and 
> ping onlist with the excellent drawing _daily_!
>     i hope you got the above, if yess, please reply with a short summary 
> onlist when you've given up the above...
>
>
>
>     On 8/18/22 18:09, Gabriel Tetzner wrote:
>      > Hi all,
>      >
>      > I have the following topology built using two wireguard tunnels:
>      >
>      > image.png
>      >
>      > In this case freertr-r3 is isolated on another network, but has a 
> public ip to tunnel wireguard with freertr-r1 which is also on another network 
> and has a public ip.
>      >
>      > This topology is working and the pings respectively for each ip:
>      >
>      > 10.0.0.2 ping 10.0.0.3
>      > 20.0.0.2 ping 20.0.0.3
>      > 10.0.0.3 ping 10.0.0.2
>      > 20.0.0.3 ping 20.0.0.2
>      >
>      > But I want 20.0.0.2 to reach 10.0.0.3, do I need to configure a route 
> for this using ipv4 route? or is there another way to route the traffic? in this 
> case I am talking about
>      > freertr-r1.
>      >