Gordan Bobic wrote: > Fiedler Roman wrote: >>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>> Von: Gordan Bobic [mailto:gordan@bobich.net] >>> >>> Fiedler Roman wrote: >>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>>>> Von: Gordan Bobic [mailto:gordan@bobich.net] >>>>> >>>>>> Fiedler Roman wrote: >>>>>> .... >>>>>> I'm trying to configure networking on a machine, where we cannot >>>>>> use any >>>>>> private network for internal communication because I might need to >>>>>> receive >>>>>> traffic from that network. So I can only use loopback, one >>>>>> private IP-Range IP >>>>>> (server external IP) and I do not want to grab one public IP-range >>>>>> for internal >>>>>> communication if avoidable. >>> .... >>>> Connect from guest to 127.0.1.1:80 is still remapped to 127.0.2.1, >>>> which is >>>> guest itself. So no connection to host via lo possible. >>> You are using 127/8 subnet on the dummy device - that won't work. You >>> need a non-loopback IP range on the dummy interface, e.g. 192.168/16. >> >> Thanks for your reply. I already used configuration with non-127 dummy >> interface >> and they are working. In current use case (description above), I have >> the problem, >> that organization cannot tell me, which private network is not in use >> at their >> location. Since I cannot handle requests from their network if I bind >> IPs to local >> interface, I was trying to do it without need of any other IPs than >> from range >> 127.0.0.0/8. > > That is most unfortunate, but I don't see a workaround - they will have > to find a suitable small private subnet in 10/8, 172.16/12 or 192.168/16 > that you can use. But since that subnet will never be routable outside > the machine itself, you can re-use it on all similar servers. Thinking about it, you may also be able to get away with using 169.254/24 link-local range for this - subject to your client's network not doing something broken with requiring that range to be routable. In theory it should be used only for internal or point-to-point connections. Gordan