RE: NAT on multihomed host

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



People, I haven't received any response to my mail sent 9 days ago.. I know
it's lenghty, but please, someone could try to help me someway???


Thanks!!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Ferrari - Decidir IT [mailto:mferrari@decidir.net]
> Sent: Domingo 6 de Enero de 2002 09:16 PM
> To: 'linux-net@vger.kernel.org'
> Subject: NAT on multihomed host
> 
> 
> Folks,
> 
> I have an urgent problem...
> 
> I have a dualhomed host, two internet uplinks, with two 
> internal networks,
> and I need to access some hosts from both of the links.
> Debian Woody, kernel 2.4.17, iproute2-ss001007, iptables v1.2.4
> 
> 
> I did NAT from 64.x.x.131 to 192.168.x.x, and from 200.x.x.218 to
> 192.168.x.x. It works ok, except for something: I can't find 
> out a way to
> force the packets DE-nated to 200.x.x.218 to go out by the 
> 200.x.x.x iface,
> they all go out by the default iface, which is 64.x.x.x.
> 
> I tryed with iproute2, these are my rules & routes:
> 
> # ip ru l
> 0:	from all lookup local 
> 32764:	from 64.x.x.128/26 lookup uunet 
> 32765:	from 200.x.x.192/27 lookup comsat 
> 32766:	from all lookup main 
> 32767:	from all lookup default 
> 
> # ip ro l table uunet
> default via 64.x.x.129 dev eth1 
> 
> # ip ro l table comsat
> default via 200.x.x.222 dev eth0 
> 
> # ip ro l table main
> 200.x.x.192/27 dev eth0  proto kernel  scope link  src 200.x.x.219
> 64.x.x.128/26 dev eth1  proto kernel  scope link  src 64.x.x.131
> 192.168.x.0/24 dev eth2  proto kernel  scope link  src 192.168.x.200
> default via 64.x.x.129 dev eth1
> 
> But it ignores my source routes. It seems like it chooses the output
> interface before prerouting (?), before de-natting, where the 
> source address
> is
> 192.168.x.x, and in that moment I don't know how it will be de-natted
> 
> Can anyone help me????
> 
> 
> As a side note, I also cannot setup loadbalancing combining 
> ip route nexthop
> with iptables MASQUERADE. I do:
> 
> # ip r d default
> # ip r a default nexthop dev eth0 via 200.x.x.222 nexthop dev eth1 via
> 64.x.x.129
> 
> and then:
> 
> # ip r l
> 200.x.x.192/27 dev eth0  proto kernel  scope link  src 200.x.x.219
> 64.x.x.128/26 dev eth1  proto kernel  scope link  src 64.x.x.131
> 192.168.x.0/24 dev eth2  proto kernel  scope link  src 192.168.x.200
> default 
> 	nexthop via 200.x.x.222  dev eth0 weight 1 dead
> 	nexthop via 64.x.x.129  dev eth1 weight 1
> 
> 
> The "dead" flag stays there, and never uses the 200.x.x.x 
> route.. Do you
> know why it could be?
> 
> 
> -
> : send the line "unsubscribe 
> linux-net" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

-
: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux 802.1Q VLAN]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Git]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News and Information]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux PCI]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux