Nikolaus Rath <Nikolaus@xxxxxxxx> writes: > Vigneswaran R <vignesh@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> On 09/13/2013 10:40 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >>> I've enabled packet forwarding and SNAT on the "ebox" computer as >>> follows: >>> >>> root@ebox:~# ip route >>> default via 23.92.25.1 dev eth0 >>> 23.92.25.0/24 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 23.92.25.96 >>> 192.168.12.0/24 dev rath proto kernel scope link src 192.168.12.1 >>> >>> root@ebox:~# iptables -L -n -v >>> Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 1314 packets, 1736K bytes) >>> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination >>> >>> Chain FORWARD (policy DROP 0 packets, 0 bytes) >>> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination >>> 150K 62M ACCEPT all -- rath eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 >>> 86746 200M ACCEPT all -- eth0 rath 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED >>> 319 22076 LOG all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 limit: avg 1/min burst 30 LOG flags 0 level 4 prefix "Rejected forwarding: " >>> 393 26172 REJECT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 reject-with icmp-net-prohibited >>> >>> Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 1142 packets, 2412K bytes) >>> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination >>> root@ebox:~# iptables -t nat -L -n -v >>> Chain PREROUTING (policy ACCEPT 36378 packets, 2383K bytes) >>> >>> Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 19982 packets, 1334K bytes) >>> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination >>> >>> Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 61430 packets, 4601K bytes) >>> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination >>> >>> Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 8333 packets, 564K bytes) >>> pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination >>> 69488 5081K SNAT all -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 to:23.92.25.96 >>> >>> >From a second computer "vostro", I can now use ebox as a >>> gateway: >>> >>> root@vostro:~# ip route add 190.93.249.164 via 192.168.12.1 >>> >>> This works fine, now connections to whatismyip.com (190.93.249.164) go >>> through ebox. >>> >>> However, when I try to be a bit more selective on vostro and use a >>> special routing table, things don't work anymore: >>> >>> root@vostro:~# iptables -t mangle -L -n >>> Chain PREROUTING (policy ACCEPT) >>> target prot opt source destination >>> >>> Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) >>> target prot opt source destination >>> >>> Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) >>> target prot opt source destination >>> >>> Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) >>> target prot opt source destination >>> MARK tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 190.93.249.164 tcp dpt:80 MARK set 0x1 >>> LOG tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 190.93.249.164 tcp dpt:80 LOG flags 0 level 4 prefix "marked: " >>> >>> Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT) >>> target prot opt source destination >>> >>> root@vostro:~# ip route del 190.93.249.164 via 192.168.12.1 >>> root@vostro:~# ip route add default via 192.168.12.1 table tovpn >>> root@vostro:~# ip rule add fwmark 0x1 table tovpn >>> >>> Now connections from vostro to 190.93.249.164 still make it to ebox, and >>> from ebox to 190.93.249.164, but the answers get stuck on ebox: >>> >>> Sep 13 04:47:53 ebox kernel: Rejected forwarding: IN=eth0 OUT=eth0 MAC=f2:3c:91:69:db:07:84:78:ac:0d:79:c1:08:00 SRC=190.93.249.164 DST=192.168.17.47 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=58 ID=0 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=80 DPT=39024 WINDOW=14480 RES=0x00 ACK SYN URGP=0 >>> >>> It seems that ebox tries to send the packet destined to go trough the >>> rath to eth0 instead, and consequency rejects them because forwarding is >>> only enabled from eth0 to rath. >>> >>> However, this only happens when vostro has the gateway route set in a >>> special routing table rather than the default table -- but how does ebox >>> even know about that? >>> >>> Can someone explain to me what is happening here and why? >> >> I have a doubt. It seems, rath of ebox is assigned with IP address in >> the range 192.168.12.0/24. >> However, IP address of vostro seems to be >> 192.168.17.47 (assuming /24). Ebox doesn't have any route to this >> range. So it try to use default route via eth0. >> >> What I assume is, 'vostro' has IP addresses in (atleast) two ranges >> (192.168.12.0/24, 192.168.17.0/24). > > That's correct. > > nikratio@vostro:~$ ip addr > 5: br0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP > link/ether c8:60:00:bf:a2:7f brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > inet 192.168.17.47/24 brd 192.168.17.255 scope global br0 > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > inet6 fe80::ca60:ff:febf:a27f/64 scope link > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > 6: rath: <POINTOPOINT,MULTICAST,NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN qlen 500 > link/none > inet 192.168.12.4/24 scope global rath > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> In the default routing table, the src IP is set to 192.168.12.x (for >> the packets originating from vostro). However, the 'tovpn' table >> didn't specify the src IP. So, when the 'tovpn' table is being used, >> the packets may have got the src IP as 192.168.17.x. > > Hmm. This would make sense, but looking at the default table, the source > address for the route via 192.168.12.x is actually also not set: > > nikratio@vostro:~$ ip route > default via 192.168.17.1 dev br0 > 190.93.249.164 via 192.168.12.1 dev rath > 192.168.12.0/24 dev rath proto kernel scope link src 192.168.12.4 > 192.168.17.0/24 dev br0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.17.47 > > This works just fine, despite the entry having no source address. So why > is it working in the default table, but not in the tovpn table? > > >> I think, you can avoid this by explicitly specifying the src IP when >> adding the route to 'tovpn' table, >> >> ip route add default via 192.168.12.1 src 192.168.12.x table tovpn > > > I'll of course try this nevertheless, thanks! Nope, this doesn't help. It's still going out with the wrong src: root@vostro:~# ip route list table tovpn 190.93.249.164 via 192.168.12.1 dev rath src 192.168.12.2 root@ebox:~# tail /var/log/kern.log Sep 13 21:28:57 ebox kernel: Rejected forwarding: IN=eth0 OUT=eth0 MAC=f2:3c:91:69:db:07:84:78:ac:0d:79:c1:08:00 SRC=91.189.89.199 DST=192.168.17.47 LEN=76 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=47 ID=0 DF PROTO=UDP SPT=123 DPT=123 LEN=56 Any ideas? Best, Nikolaus -- Encrypted emails preferred. PGP fingerprint: 5B93 61F8 4EA2 E279 ABF6 02CF A9AD B7F8 AE4E 425C »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.« -- 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