1997-10-15 - ipnat problems continued

Header Data

From: Matthew Patton <patton@sysnet.net>
To: misc@openbsd.org
Message Hash: 0c837cc7bf36ed52b47f2efbf326d88e53c4c3fd6246be42d2116c4232f75195
Message ID: <l03110706b06b487e1e49@[206.142.16.66]>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-10-15 06:51:16 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 23:51:16 -0700 (PDT)

Raw message

From: Matthew Patton <patton@sysnet.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 23:51:16 -0700 (PDT)
To: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: ipnat problems continued
Message-ID: <l03110706b06b487e1e49@[206.142.16.66]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


I've tried varios purmutations of the map rules to no positive effect.
map ppp0 192.168.1.0/24 -> 206.142.xx.yy/32 portmap tcp/udp 10000:20000
repeat except substitute   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ with 0.0.0.0 or ppp0. Neither works.

I ran tcpdump on ppp0 on the gateway and sure enough, the box is sending
down the modem link 192.168.1.10 (the particular LAN host trying to
initiate an outside connection) as the source IP. Now if everything were
correct shouldn't it be the IP addr of the local end of the PPP link as
hosted on the gateway box? (ie 206.142.xx.yy)

ipnat -l has never once shown any indication of active connections.
Either nat is seriosly not working under stock v2.1 (anyone prove it does
work?) or there are some undocumented and not exactly obvios dependencies
with regard to kernel options.

Can someone please mail me a kernel config that is guarenteed to work on a
stock v2.1 box for i386 architecture?

BTW, how come kernal option IPNAT isn't documented ANYWHERE? It's not even
in the ALL file.

--------
Windows95: noun. 32-bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16-bit
  patch to an 8-bit operating system originally coded for a 4-bit
  microprocessor, written by a 2-bit company that can't stand 1 bit of
  competition. (author unknown)







Thread