Re: Using NAT to relay traffic

[Jared Cook <jared@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks.  The SNAT piece indeed was the part I was missing.  It all works 
great now.


Grant Taylor wrote:

> The problem that you are having when you port forward traffic from Box 
> A to Box B is that the returning traffic comes directly from Box B to 
> the client that sent the traffic in the first place thus you have an 
> incorrect communications path.  Ironically I just had to work on a 
> situation sort of similar to this one.  What I did in my situation to 
> accomplish this was to DNAT the traffic destined to Box A over to Box 
> B, like you have done.  You also need to SNAT the traffic leaving Box 
> A on it's way Box B to be from Box A's IP so that when Box B replies 
> it will reply back to Box A which will in turn reply back to the 
> client system.  Thus you no longer have a triangle of client to Box a 
> to Box B to client but rather client to Box A to Box B to Box A to 
> client.  Let me know what your network config looks like if you would 
> like me to come up with some iptables rules for you.
>
> Reference my replies to "HELP! Transparent Proxy using bridging 2.6.9 
> and REDIRECT on    different subnet" thread for an example or email me 
> and I'll try to provide more help.
>
>
>
> Grant. . . .
>
> Jared Cook wrote:
>
> > I have two servers on two different networks.  I am running a service 
> > on box A that I am transitioning to box B.  While I wait on DNS to 
> > propagate, I would like to do some iptables magic to send traffic 
> > from box A to box B using NAT.  For instance, when pop3 email users 
> > connect to box A, I would like box A to send the request to box B 
> > transparantly.  Is this possible?  I have had success doing port 
> > forwarding to the local machine, but when I specify box B as the 
> > "--to", it doesn't work.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jared