similar to: pp_nat & port_forwarding

I have setup natd, enabled logging with -l and it is working perfectly. However is there a more detailed log to see the translation tables. I need to log the ipaddress internal 172.*.*.* to the outside with what port is being used. natd just seems to log the statistics such as icmp=5 and so on. If natd does not have this function what does?

Hello I am trying to redirect all http traffic of unauthorized wifi users on a wireless hotspot to a login page. The problem I have is that I can not disable the regular address translation (I want the source address to stay the same). 10.0.0.7 is the wifi client 195.250.155.29 is the web wifi user tries to access from his browser 195.113.17.94 is my login page 10.0.0.1 is the wifi

Hi Guys, I know this is slightly off topic, but it''d be great to get some feedback from anyone who''s using mod_proxy on Apache 2.2 to redircet to a rails app on mongrel. Everything has been running fine generally but a few days back we started getting a gap in the performance between the Apache port and the mongrel port. accessing through port 80 was averaging ten times longer

[ -netters, please Cc me or security@ with replies. ] I'm running into trouble integrating dynamic racoon-based IPSec into a network with ipfw and natd. I need to be able to allow VPN access from any address from authenticated clients. I've got the dynamic VPN working, with racoon negotiating SAs and installing SPs, but the problem is that I can't tell whether an incoming packet on

I'm facing a problem with accessing a HTTPd (Apache) jail locally. Consider this jail scenario: /etc/hosts: 127.0.0.1 localhost foo.com 172.16.0.1 apache /etc/natd.conf: use_sockets yes same_ports yes unregistered_only yes redirect_port tcp 172.16.0.1:80 80 redirect_port tcp 172.16.0.1:443 443 /etc/firewall.sh ... ${fwcmd} add divert natd all from any to any via ${oif}(IPFW) ... rl0, my

Hi, in the kernel I have these lines: [...] device miibus # MII bus support device rl device ed options IPFIREWALL #firewall options IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE #enable logging to syslogd(8) options IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE_LIMIT=0 #limit verbosity options IPDIVERT #divert sockets options DUMMYNET

Hi. We just opened a gaming center and have chosen to run a FreeBsd box for our firewall. IPFW is configured at it's very basic running natd through rl0 and allowing any to any connections from the lan to the outer world. Natd controls access to the lan. We have a 6.0 mb/s ADSL net connection for all the gaming clients to use, however if a gamer starts downloading a file, that file

Made a typo in the cc: line. Coffee time, I guess. -------- Original Message -------- Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 19:52:17 -0400 From: Bob K <melange@yip.org> To: Michael Collette <metrol@metrol.net> CC: freebsd.-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Down the MPD road > I did this, and it does correct the immediate problem. Of course, it > also > creates a new glitchy. >

hi all, i've been struggling with setting appropriate rules for an SMTP-server behind by NAT'd firewall. it's not that there is too little info on the web -- or here, for that matter -- there's scads of it for seemingly endless configs/req'ts -- none that seem to be exactly my own. bottom line: i'm a bit confused, and looking for some experienced advice. my goals (for

I am having problems in the implementation of a VPN, below made a project of my net: INTRANET (10.0.0.0/24) | 10.0.0.5 xl0 NetBSD IPNAT ( map wi0 10.0.0.0/24 -> 192.168.213.10 ) wi0 192.168.213.10/30 | | Wireless VPN | | 192.168.213.9/30 xl2 FreeBSD NATD ( divert natd all from any to any ) xl0 200.x.x.5/24 | 200.x.x.1/24

Hallo there, I had to change the provider. And after that my public IP adress are routed straight through FreeBSD Box. What is it best way to do it? I personally done it the way, where exist the localnet alias for every interface... eg.. ifconfig_ed0="inet 62.168.40.188 netmask 255.255.255.252 broadcast 62.168.40.191" after that there is local interface 192.168.1.1/255 and it's

Is it just me or do others have a problem with the ATA-186 de-registering? Every couple of hours, if I don't make use of the ATA connected line, I find that I have to unplug and let the ATA reboot. After that it is good to go for awhile, but eventually I have to repeat the process. My ATA sits behind a NATd firewall, any ideas what might cause the de-registration? Kim C. Callis

"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> writes: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 10:37:26AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: >> Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: >> > On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:50:42 +1030 >> > Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> wrote: >> > >> >> Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com>

"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> writes: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 10:37:26AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: >> Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: >> > On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:50:42 +1030 >> > Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> wrote: >> > >> >> Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com>

I feel I should know the answer to this, but I wanted to verify. I have a bunch of Windows PC's running Win 2K Pro, on three subnetworks. Two of the subnets are served by Unix (FreeBSD) boxes running NATD, but all are joined to a domain being run on a Win 2K Pro server in another building on the campus. So far I haven't joined the two Unix boxes to the domain. I'd like to

On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 11:24:42AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > On Sun, 5 Jul 2015 14:59:54 +0200 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 05, 2015 at 12:58:53PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 09:21:22AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > The virtio_ring.h header is used in userspace

On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 11:24:42AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > On Sun, 5 Jul 2015 14:59:54 +0200 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 05, 2015 at 12:58:53PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 09:21:22AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > The virtio_ring.h header is used in userspace

On 09/25/2017 07:54 PM, Halil Pasic wrote: > > > On 09/25/2017 04:45 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: >> There is no recent user space application available anymore which still >> supports this old virtio transport, so let's disable this by default. >> >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth at redhat.com> > > I don't have any objections, but there may be

On 09/25/2017 07:54 PM, Halil Pasic wrote: > > > On 09/25/2017 04:45 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: >> There is no recent user space application available anymore which still >> supports this old virtio transport, so let's disable this by default. >> >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth at redhat.com> > > I don't have any objections, but there may be

On Wed, 4 Mar 2015 11:25:56 +0100 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 04:44:54PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> writes: > > > On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 10:37:26AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > >> Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: >