RE: Problems with NAT

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

 



SNAT should not be used for MASQUERADING.. it's not advised anyway but still works but who knows what possible problems it may cause.

Thanks,
____________________________________________
George Vieira
Systems Manager
georgev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Citadel Computer Systems Pty Ltd
http://www.citadelcomputer.com.au

Phone   : +61 2 9955 2644
HelpDesk: +61 2 9955 2698
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Hellman [mailto:netfilter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 11:59 AM
To: jhime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; George Vieira; 'Ray Leach'; 'Netfilter Mailing
List'
Subject: RE: Problems with NAT


never tried it, but why couldn't you just add ACCEPT rules in PREROUTING
[before the NAT rule] for each LAN not_to_be_natted?

-t nat -A POSTROUTING -s LAN A -d LAN B -j ACCEPT
-t nat -A POSTROUTING -s LAN A -d LAN C -j ACCEPT
-t nat -A POSTROUTING -s LAN A -d 0/0 -j SNAT --to Firewall_IP_address



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Netfilter Development]     [Linux Kernel Networking Development]     [Netem]     [Berkeley Packet Filter]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Advanced Routing & Traffice Control]     [Bugtraq]

  Powered by Linux