[Top] [All Lists]

Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump

To: Werner Almesberger <almesber@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: netfilter NAT vs. pump
From: Aki M Laukkanen <amlaukka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 00:33:50 +0300 (EET DST)
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200006132058.WAA27846@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Werner Almesberger wrote:
>  - pump doesn't explicitly set the interface (it binds to {,68}),
>    but eth1 gets picked for some lucky reason anyway

ack. I have exactly the same problem. This far I've worked around it
by bringing eth1 always up first.

>  1) I'm not sure why ip_route_output returns such a strange
>     interface/address combination (didn't look up the details since it
>     happens to err on the convenient side)

Didn't check either but think it's a list where you simply take the tail 
(or head).

>      - make it happen less often by setting NFC_ALTERED only when
>        something has changed (probably a good idea in any case)

There seems to be a FIXME waiting for removal in ip_nat_fn(). Depends
on a couple of things I didn't check but testing for info->num_manips != 0
might work. Will test tomorrow.
> Does anybody know who's taking care of pump ? I've only found the SRPM,
> and it is remarkably devoid of any hint to its origin :-(

How about man pump? :) It's developed and maintained at RedHat internally.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>