On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 09:09:55AM -0400, Peter Marshall wrote: > What most of the docs are refering to with "No NAT" is that for most vpn > servers, you can not have the VPN server on an internal IP address .... it > has to have a public address. > I don't know if you've looked at pptpproxy. I use it very often and it works great for me. You can find more info aon this site: http://www.mgix.com/pptpproxy/ Greetz, Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alexandros Papadopoulos" <apapadop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: <netfilter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 7:36 AM > Subject: VPN over netfilter NAT > > > I stumbled across > http://www.linuxhomenetworking.com/linux-adv/vpn-linux.htm today, which > states that "NAT breaks VPNs". > > Is this just an over-simplifying statement that really means "if you're > reading this, then don't even try setting up a NAT-traversing VPN"? > > This is exactly what I'm planning to do; I've got my mind set on having > the two VPN endpoints inside two NATed networks, both managed by > respective dedicated linux boxes running only netfilter. > > If that is indeed possible (and doable for a first timer), could anyone > provide some relevant pointers to documentation? > > Cheers > > -A >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
