Subject: Re: nat configuration
To: Andrew Brown <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org>
Date: 01/22/2001 12:30:35
> >> >> >Hmmm.... I just tried it, and now it works! I thought it didn't used to.
> >> >> >Either I misremembered, or it's been fixed.
> >> >>
> >> >> um...what works? a more current nat can mux pings?
> >> >
> >> >Yes. My 1.5 NAT box seems to be multiplexing pings. I had one box ping
> >> >ftp.netbsd.org, and another ping cvs.netbsd.org, and they both worked. My
> >> >nat config looks like yours, except that I have my hard IP in there
> >> >instead of 0.0.0.0, and I am using the outgoing ethernet card. :-)
> >> make it more interesting, just to amuse me? ping the same outside
> >> address ( i usually use 126.96.36.199) from two machines inside the nat
> >> and lemme know if it works.
> >Yes, it works. libalias (used by user-ppp) recognises icmp traffic,
> >and nat's the sequence number and IP.
> no...what i meant was (a) using the nat built into netbsd-current, (b)
> ping one destination from (c) more than one machine behind the nat.
> that, i believe, is what doesn't work (at least, not for me). that is
> what works using the userspace ppp implementation.
Sorry, I misunderstood. We're saying the same thing.
> >> >> >All my machines are running 1.5.
> >> >>
> >> >> all my machines are running current with less than a two month lag
> >> >> behind today.
> >> >
> >> >I hope it didn't get fixed then broken.
> >> me too.
> >It still works (and will continue to).
> using the in-kernel nat, or the userspace one? i know the userspace
> one works.
Sorry, I misunderstood again. I mean user-ppp :OI
> >user-ppp was originally written by IIJ and was picked up by me and
> >almost entirely re-written (multi-link support made this necessary)
> >since then.
> are there any common roots with the kernel one, or is it a completely
> clean-room re-implementation? i expect that it's completely
I believe it's completely independent although the VJ header
compression code is derived from the same thing (the rfc AFAIK). All
the stuff I've done since '96/'97 is original.
If anyone's been in the pppd kernel code they'd know why... it's
``evolved'' and has a lot of nasty bits that should really be
re-designed away (IMHO).
> of course. i'm beginning to suspect that some people are confusing
> what i'm saying.
Me for one :-)
> |-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
> email@example.com * "ah! i see you have the internet
> firstname.lastname@example.org (Andrew Brown) that goes *ping*!"
> email@example.com * "information is power -- share the wealth."
Brian <brian@Awfulhak.org> <brian@[uk.]FreeBSD.org>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour !