Re: Windows/NetBIOS & SNAT

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

 



Nicholas Couchman wrote:
I've done quite a bit of Google searching and haven't turned up anything definitive hear.  I have a few Windows XP machines that I want to put behind a Linux/iptables NAT configuration.  The domain controllers and WINS servers sit outside the NAT configuration.  On the Linux side, I've enabled ip forwarding, and added the following rule with iptables:

iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 172.16.34.0/24 -j SNAT --to-source 192.168.100.100

However, I'm getting the following error when trying to log on to Windows:
The system cannot log you on now because the domain DOMAIN is not
available.  I've loaded the nf_conntrack and nf_conntrack_netbios_ns modules in Linux, but this hasn't helped.  I've done some packet tracing, and when I look at tcpdump, on the "inside" interface, I see requests to the WINS system but never any replies.  When I look at packets on the "outside" interface, I see the SNAT'd requests from the 192.168.100.100 interface going to the WINS server on port 138, and I see the replies coming from the WINS server to the 192.168.100.100 IP address, port 138.  Herein lies my problem - I'm guessing that the Linux system itself isn't actually expecting the reply on port 138, and so it's discarding the packet.  My question is this: is there some rule I ought to put somewhere else in iptables to have these packets returned to the "inside" network, to the correct host?

Oh, yeah, one other thing - all iptables is doing is NAT - there are no firewall rules that would block trafffic, and the default policy is "ACCEPT".

Thanks,
Nick
Hello,

I'm just guessing, but as you do source nat, the wins server will only see requests from the nat source and will only reply to that address - trying to assign a netbios name to 192.168.100.100. I don't know about nf_conntrack_netbios_ns, but maybe you would need something like nf_conntrack_nat_netbios_ns, which I don't know if it exists. But, do you really need the nat? Why not add the proper routes for the networks? There nf_conntrack_netbios_ns may do it's job within a simple filtering ruleset.

Regards,

Mart
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[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