search for: dnated

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1427 Bug ID: 1427 Summary: can not reuse source port to a DNATed IP if it is being used by another connection Product: netfilter/iptables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: NAT Assi...

...there. I have a problem when the fw is rebooted however. When it comes back up, interfaces are brought up before shorewall is started and the external openvpn clients are trying to reconnect. When shorewall starts, it blocks (in the external 2fw chain) the openvpn ports which are configured to be DNATed. I''ve pinned it down to the fact that when the interfaces first come up, the external clients attempt to connect to the non-DNATed (yet) ports which creates a connection tracking entry for the clients->fw. When shorewall starts, it sees future packets as part of that connection and dro...

Hi. I have strange troubles with DNATing UDP packets. The situation: 1. We have local network 10.10.0.0/16 2. We have a "server network" 192.168.1.0/25 connected with local network by a router 10.10.100.1 (other ip 192.168.1.1). 3. Web server is located at 192.168.1.2 4. There are HW pingers in the net 10.10.0.0/16 whose do ping 10.10.100.1 every second. The ping is the UDP packet

...e DMZ. The dialup IPs (a /29 subnet) are routed into the DMZ. ADSL1 is my normal default route, with some host-specific routes via ADSL2. The problem is that if i switch my default route to ADSL2, all the DNAT rules that apply to ADSL1 break. I can see the packets coming into the box and getting DNATed, but on the return path, netfilter fails to send the packet out at all. I''ve checked my rules several times and i can''t see any problems with them. Any suggestions? -- Paul Gear, Manager IT Operations, Redlands College 38 Anson Road, Wellington Point 4160, Australia (Please se...

Hi all! I''ve set up a Linux box with shorewall doing proxy arp as per http://www.shorewall.net/shorewall_setup_guide.htm#ProxyARP the 5.2 (non routed) example. Everything is working great except for one thing, and that leads me to my question: is there a conflict between proxy arp and pptp? I''ve set the apropriate ACCEPT rules to allow tcp port 1723 and protocol 47 to the host

Is anyone using Shorewall and DNATing their ssl connections? I have replicated my port 80 configuration for 443, but cannot connect through the firewall (page cannot be displayed). SSL is working behind the firewall. Am I going about this the wrong way?

...=56789 packets=115 bytes=10580 [UNREPLIED] src=192.168.1.72 dst=192.168.1.69 sport=56789 dport=11111 packets=0 bytes=0 mark=0 use=1 7) NOT stopping hping setup DNAT rule: # iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p udp -d 192.168.1.72 --dport 56789 -j DNAT --to 10.0.1.130 8) run tcpdump on eth1 and see no DNATed packets 9) run 'conntrack -F' or 'ifconfig eth0 down; sleep 60s; ifconfig eth0 up' or stop hping for a minute. The main idea is to make this flow expired in conntrack. After this traffic is being DNATed successfully. I'm not sure this is NAT related problem, probably it is mo...

Hi, [sorry for the crosspost, I don''t know whether this is a routing or ebtables problem] I want to redirect all HTTP traffic passing through my bridge to a squid proxy on another machine. However, setting up brouting as suggested in the ebtables examples doesn''t work and the packets get dropped on the floor completely. /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ +----------------------+

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello, Shorewall-3.0.3 RH9 (+legacy updates) eth0: loc: 192.168.1.0/24 eth0:0: loc: 192.168.20.0/24 eth1:: 69.70.32.8/29 I''m worked all day on an issue I found today and I just can''t find a way to fix my problem. So, basically, for now, my network looks like this: Internet ^ | (69.70.32.8/29) Firewall 192.168.1.1

...with proxyarp. In my local zone I have a host to which I DNAT. I have discovered that I can reach the host in the local zone by attempting to connect to the fw (As expected) or ANY proxyarped host in my dmz zone (as not expected). Is this normal ? (I''ve just discovered that actually the dnated host answers to requests sent to any IP routed to my host!) Relevant configuration: /etc/shorewall/rules DNAT net loc:10.100.100.2 tcp 21 DNAT net loc:10.100.100.2 udp 21 ACCEPT net dmz:83.xx.xx.49 tcp 25 ACCEPT net dmz:83.xx.xx.49...

...Available Owner Match: Available Ipset Match: Available CONNMARK Target: Available Connmark Match: Available Raw Table: Available CLASSIFY Target: Available On to the question. I have a zone set up for DMZ, by default any user (eth2) which comes into that zone get their port 80 DNATed to the firewall''s port 80 which dishes out a logon to the network style page. This works. Once the user logs on, it adds the ip address and mac address to a IPSET list. This ipset is put into a dynamic zone called dyn. The two zones obviously over lap, so I followed the instructions on o...

Hi gang, I''ve got a problem with shorewall, it keeps dropping packets when it should be DNATing them. I want all connections on a tcp port 4662 to be forwarded to a machine on my network (192.168.0.5) - the port is used for mldonkey (P2P app). It seems to be partially working - loads of packets are being DNAT''ed but some are not - I cant figure out why! The firewall

I''m trying to setup some DNAT and the packets seem to be disappearing after the PREROUTING step. The packets are coming in eth2 (both LOG targets in iptables and tcpdump confirm this). They are then DNATed to an IP that should cause them to go out eth3. However I never see them go out that interface. I have tried putting LOG rules into the FORWARD chain with no success. I''m pretty sure the packet isn''t hitting a DROP rule as all my DROP rules have a LOG rule directly in front of the...

I''ve made some tests... eth2 is my internal interface, LAN is connected here. Before I had IMQ device in AB mode... PREROUTING [A]fter NAT, POSTROUTING [B]efore NAT. I want the same situation on ifb. I do this in this way: --- # incoming traffic here from LAN is before NAT tc qdisc add dev eth2 handle ffff: ingress # outcoming traffic here from WAN is after NAT tc qdisc add dev eth2

...en I enable this option the kernel seems to accept my command. My router starts to answer arp requsets for <inet_ip_addres>, as it should. But no route DNAT seems to occur. If I add some LOG rule to FORWARD iptables chain I can see packets to <inet_ip_address> being forwarded but not DNATed as it should. Who supports this route nat code in the kernel? Are they going to support this cool feature or it''s deprecated and I should look for other sollution? How can this be done??? If this is the wrong place to ask question about ip utility or anybody knows the right place for...

...offical IP-address of one of the servers, it doesn''t work. Let''s say 192.168.1.212 wants to connect to 10.1.0.3. It goes through it''s default gateway 192.168.1.1, which is the only IP address assigned on eth2, the internal interface. It hits the PREROUTING chain and gets DNATed to 192.168.1.2. It hits routing code and is matched against "$INTNET dev eth2" in table server1. It hits POSTROUTING and gets SNATed with 10.1.0.1, the external, designated IP-address fo the router for the clients. It should be pushed out on the internal interface. The server receives the...

Greetings List Members, I''ll firstly apologise if this isn''t the place that I should be posting this message but here goes. What I want to do is have a VPN (PPTP/IPSEC/CIPE/etc) server, but it must support more than one simultaneous connection. I currently have a PPTP VPN server setup that has port 1723 and protocol 47 DNAT''d through to the internal IP

Hello again I asked a question about routing a week or so back and have progressed somewhat since then. I have managed to progress somewhat with proxy arp but not with routing. I will repeat my setup: LAN is on eth0 and uses masq and 192.168.1.0/24 NET is on eth1 and default routes are on ISP routeur xxx.xxx.79.126 and xxx.xxx.242.126 DMZ is on eth2 and consists of 2 complete class C blocks

...to 2003, behind a bering (shorewall) firewall. OWA is experiencing the issues described in the following technet article: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;280823 OWA displays Loading, and does not display properly. I am already running over https. (ports 80 and 443 are DNATed to the server). I have made the registry entry suggested by MS to downgrade the browser, and this works as intended, but the web interface then is quite bad. OWA works fine inside the network, but not thru the firewall. The article above states that: Internet Explorer version 5.0 and later supp...

Try to SNAT the incoming conection too, then your server see only the 200.x.x.x IP for the incoming calls. You have DNAT for redirections, add a postrouting SNAT. I supose that you are DNATing in PREROUTING and you will add a rule (only for example) for SNAT the incoming calls from 200.x.x.x router: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -d <internal server ip> -j MASQUERADE Perhaps