From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcus Sundberg Subject: Re: [PATCH] ip_nat_tftp: Fix expectation NAT. Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 13:57:11 +0100 Message-ID: <43997F27.3070106@ingate.com> References: <43980FAA.6060608@ingate.com> <20051209045520.GB4244@rama.exocore.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: To: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org In-Reply-To: <20051209045520.GB4244@rama.exocore.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org Harald Welte wrote: > On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 11:49:14AM +0100, Marcus Sundberg wrote: > >>this patch fixes the case where the port in an initial TFTP packet >>is SNATed. Previously the port was never DNATed back for the expected >>connection. > > This is one of the cases where I'd really appreciate having a nfsim > test for the testsuite to > 1) help understanding the problem > 2) prevent further regressions > > Would you be willing to provide us with a testcase for nfsim-testsuite? > Unfortunately we cannot offer anything but bonus points ;) Well, I'm currently looking at the RTSP patch for 2.6.15, so getting familiar with nfsim might be useful in any case. I'll have a look. //Marcus -- ---------------------------------------+-------------------------- Marcus Sundberg | Firewalls with SIP & NAT Software Developer, Ingate Systems AB | http://www.ingate.com/