From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Furniss Subject: Re: Help: iptables NAT broken with pppoe Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 14:19:33 +0100 Message-ID: <4280B4E5.1070209@dsl.pipex.com> References: <42808D9C.2000603@dsl.pipex.com> <1115397393l.3864l.0l@antares.localdomain> <427C5C41.3010407@riverviewtech.net> <1115496014l.3549l.0l@antares.localdomain> <427EFB7D.8010503@riverviewtech.net> <1115663859l.3308l.0l@antares.localdomain> <427FAF51.9000102@riverviewtech.net> <4448571.1115722979939.JavaMail.ngmail@webmail-06.arcor-online.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4448571.1115722979939.JavaMail.ngmail@webmail-06.arcor-online.net> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed" To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Albrecht_Dre=DF?= Cc: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org, gtaylor@riverviewtech.net Albrecht Dre=DF wrote: >>One thought - the tcpdump is incomplete by just looking at port 80 you=20 >>can't see what ICMP are being sent. >=20 >=20 > Well, the idea was to reduce the amount of data reported by tcpdump. My= naive assumption was that running the two tcpdump's on eth0 and ppp0, I = would see the request packet coming from eth0, the masqueraded one on ppp= 0, and the same process in the opposite direction for the reply. >=20 > Why do you think it would be important to see the icmp's, too? Just thought it would be better to be able to see all what was going on=20 - I have no specific ideas, though. Andy.