Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*netfilter\s+NAT\s+vs\.\s+pump\s*$/: 20 ]

Total 20 documents matching your query.

1. netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: xxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 22:58:55 +0200 (MET DST)
I've come across a rather nasty problem: if I configure my 2.4.0test1* kernel without "Full NAT", DHCP works as expected. If I add NAT support, DHCP fails miserably. Here are the gory details: Setup:
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00176.html (11,873 bytes)

2. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: xxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 00:33:50 +0300 (EET DST)
ack. I have exactly the same problem. This far I've worked around it by bringing eth1 always up first. Didn't check either but think it's a list where you simply take the tail (or head). There seems
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00177.html (8,910 bytes)

3. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: xxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 23:29:37 -0400
Werner> re-routing, the interface is eth1, as expected, destination IP is Werner> 255.255.255.255 (okay), and source IP is 10.0.0.1 (not nice, but Werner> probably doesn't really matter to DHCP) - A
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00178.html (8,900 bytes)

4. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: xxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 09:58:00 +0200 (MET DST)
Okay, then it's probably impossible to get correct behaviour with the current design of pump if there's already another configured interface. I've just tested the Hariguchi/Viznyuk dhcpcd a bit more
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00179.html (8,985 bytes)

5. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: xxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:51:55 +0400 (MSK DST)
Of course, packets with zero address cannot be sent out. If udp source is zero, it means only that kernel should select some valid address itself. Apparently, the interface is selected to eth1 becau
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00180.html (8,456 bytes)

6. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: xxxxx
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 11:55:34 -0400
Werner> Okay, then it's probably impossible to get correct behaviour with Werner> the current design of pump if there's already another configured Werner> interface. There is a reason that ISC dhclie
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00181.html (8,636 bytes)

7. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: xxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 23:45:01 +0000
Werner, Harm Verhagen is running dhcpd and pump on a single gateway machine (cable modem, I think). Since upgrading from 2.2 he has been unable to obtain a DHCP lease from the modem (eth0) when the i
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00182.html (8,353 bytes)

8. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: xxxx>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 07:01:25 +0200 (MET DST)
Good ! :-) Actually, the further discussion in netdev convinced me that pump is broken by design and probably not worth fixing, given the availability of equivalent correct implementations. My /sbin/
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00187.html (9,406 bytes)

9. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: xxxxx
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 18:30:14 +1000
Yep. And NAT only makes sense for `simple' stuff anyway; NATting local src=0.0.0.0 packets is just plain wierd. This patch is trivial and clean. Can you test it with unpatched pump? Also sets NFC_ALT
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00200.html (11,344 bytes)

10. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: xxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:32:10 +0200 (MET DST)
Seems to work in my setup. Thanks, - Werner -- _________________________________________________________________________ / Werner Almesberger, ICA, EPFL, CH werner.almesberger@xxxxxxxxxxx / /_IN_N_03
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00207.html (8,119 bytes)

11. netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: Werner Almesberger <almesber@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 22:58:55 +0200 (MET DST)
I've come across a rather nasty problem: if I configure my 2.4.0test1* kernel without "Full NAT", DHCP works as expected. If I add NAT support, DHCP fails miserably. Here are the gory details: Setup:
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00475.html (11,873 bytes)

12. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: Aki M Laukkanen <amlaukka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 00:33:50 +0300 (EET DST)
ack. I have exactly the same problem. This far I've worked around it by bringing eth1 always up first. Didn't check either but think it's a list where you simply take the tail (or head). There seems
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00476.html (8,939 bytes)

13. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: Michael Richardson <mcr@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 23:29:37 -0400
Werner> re-routing, the interface is eth1, as expected, destination IP is Werner> 255.255.255.255 (okay), and source IP is 10.0.0.1 (not nice, but Werner> probably doesn't really matter to DHCP) - A
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00477.html (8,988 bytes)

14. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: Werner Almesberger <almesber@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 09:58:00 +0200 (MET DST)
Okay, then it's probably impossible to get correct behaviour with the current design of pump if there's already another configured interface. I've just tested the Hariguchi/Viznyuk dhcpcd a bit more
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00478.html (9,014 bytes)

15. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:51:55 +0400 (MSK DST)
Hello! Of course, packets with zero address cannot be sent out. If udp source is zero, it means only that kernel should select some valid address itself. Apparently, the interface is selected to eth1
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00479.html (8,485 bytes)

16. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: Michael Richardson <mcr@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 11:55:34 -0400
Werner> Okay, then it's probably impossible to get correct behaviour with Werner> the current design of pump if there's already another configured Werner> interface. There is a reason that ISC dhclie
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00480.html (8,724 bytes)

17. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: Andrew Morton <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 23:45:01 +0000
Werner, Harm Verhagen is running dhcpd and pump on a single gateway machine (cable modem, I think). Since upgrading from 2.2 he has been unable to obtain a DHCP lease from the modem (eth0) when the i
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00481.html (8,382 bytes)

18. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: Werner Almesberger <almesber@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 07:01:25 +0200 (MET DST)
Good ! :-) Actually, the further discussion in netdev convinced me that pump is broken by design and probably not worth fixing, given the availability of equivalent correct implementations. My /sbin/
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00486.html (9,431 bytes)

19. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 18:30:14 +1000
Yep. And NAT only makes sense for `simple' stuff anyway; NATting local src=0.0.0.0 packets is just plain wierd. This patch is trivial and clean. Can you test it with unpatched pump? Also sets NFC_ALT
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00499.html (11,372 bytes)

20. Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump (score: 1)
Author: Werner Almesberger <almesber@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:32:10 +0200 (MET DST)
Seems to work in my setup. Thanks, - Werner -- _________________________________________________________________________ / Werner Almesberger, ICA, EPFL, CH werner.almesberger@xxxxxxxxxxx / /_IN_N_03
/archives/netdev/2000-06/msg00506.html (8,179 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu