Hello Peter, I think you have post your problem to linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Due kernel problem occur in your case Rgds, Anwara -----Original Message----- From: lartc-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lartc-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Peter Volkov Alexandrovich Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 1:10 PM To: lartc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: ip-cref and route nat. Hello. The problem I have is route nat. Short question: Must "route nat", mentioned in ip-cref documentation comming with iproute2 package, work with 2.6.9 kernel? Long question and description of the problem: There is an appendix C in ip-cref by Alexey Kuznetsov called "Route NAT Status". I've followed this configuration with 2.4.2x kernel and everything works. But now I'm forced to move to 2.6.9 kernel due to new SATA controller in my server. And problem is that it is not working. When I issue: # ip route nat <inet_ip_address> via <local_ip_address> I the answer is: RTNETLINK answers: invalid argument So seems like some option is not enabled in my kernel. Well actualy I have all options and suboptions enabled in my kernel configuration under "TCP/IP networking" -> "IP: advanced router". I've tried 2.6.8.1 kernel. And found out that there exist option "IP: fast network address translation" under "IP: advanced router" that is absent in 2.6.9. When 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 this question, please tell me. I've tried to google and I've even tried to find an answer in sources, but with no success also. Thank you very much in advance, ______________ Peter. P.S. Sorry for reposting. But for two weeks no one answered. Another reason for reposting during my previous post mail list was broken... _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/ _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
