From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rodrigo Severo Subject: Re: Problem using fwmarks as routing key: "MASQUERADE: Route sent us somewhere else." Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 17:13:07 -0200 Sender: netfilter-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <40117243.4090606@fabricadeideias.com> References: <001c01c3e043$93583cd0$1684188d@Kiste> <20040123160603.GA7516@cannon.eng.us.uu.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20040123160603.GA7516@cannon.eng.us.uu.net> Errors-To: netfilter-admin@lists.netfilter.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed" To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org Thhoep, >On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 06:25:22PM +0100, Thhoep wrote: > > >>----------- >>kernel: request_module: failed /sbin/modprobe -- net-pf-10. error =3D = 256 >>kernel: MASQUERADE: Route sent us somewhere else. >> >> I think you can easily solve your problem substituting MASQUERADE with SNAT. There is one upside and one downside to this solution. The downside is the extra work you will have setting a create/delete updated SNAT each time an ADSL goes up/down. The upside is that it actually works :) I say so because I have a working 2 ADSL connections + 1 fixed connection setup working fine with the MARK + ip rule + SNAT mix. I hope it helps you, Rodrigo Severo -- ---------------------------------------------------- Rodrigo Severo F=E1brica de Id=E9ias Fone: +55(61)321 1357 Fax: +55(61)223 1712 SBS - Quadra 2 - Ed. Empire Center - Sala 1301 Bras=EDlia/DF - Brasil CEP: 70.070-904 ----------------------------------------------------