From: Kim Jensen <kimj@dawn.dk>
To: Benjamin Tompkins <netfilter@dahanga.org>
Cc: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org
Subject: Re: Unusual routing problem
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 20:28:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200303242028.09150.kimj@dawn.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <04d501c2f232$c0dbebc0$93a22ad1@blueone.net>
Hi Benjamin,
I have recently been playing with the same thing, and have a still unanswered
question regarding the possibility to combine MASQUERADING with NAT!
Anyway, if you keep things down to a simple level, then all you have to do is
create a second routing table (copy), and then add a fwmark rule to to tell
the routing system, that the second table should be used when the mark is
matched.
In your iptables, you mark all packets which are bound for your secondary
route. While the default set up will ensure that you have all packets running
through normally.
Ip routing rule:
$ ip rule add fwmark xxx table yyy
in iptables:
$ iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING [conditions] -j MARK --set-mark xxx
Hopes this helps. However, if you manage to set up your system with working
masquerading & natting, please give me a hint - I'm completely stuck and are
currently resolving to using aliasing!
/Kim
On Monday 24 March 2003 19:25, Benjamin Tompkins wrote:
> I am attempting to route myself an ip block from my office to my home via a
> tunnel. Simple enough. The catch is, I only want the tunnel to be used for
> lan destined traffic and incoming connections to my IP block. The lan
> destined traffic is easy, the trick apparently is getting the block to be
> accessible via the internet, without forcing all traffic to use the tunnel.
> A diagram.
>
> eth0 (DHCP) cable modem eth1 (x.x.x.1/28) LAN
> \ /
> Linux Machine
>
> ppp0 (x.x.x.2/30)
>
> Ok, so what I have so far is as follows.
>
> This takes care of access to the office network.
> route add -net x.x.x.1 netmask 255.255.255.240 dev eth1
> route add -net x.x.x.0 netmask 255.255.254.0 dev ppp0
> route add -host x.x.x.1 dev eth0
>
> Now to use the cable for everything else.
> iptables -A POSTROUTING -s x.x.x.1/28 -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE
>
> So now I can access my office lan and vice versa, and everything else gets
> masqed out the cable. But I'm having a heck of a time letting the box to
> know that stuff requested via ppp0, needs to go out ppp0. I have looked at
> using the mangle table making rules for input and forward, but am just
> missing something along the way. Any help anyone can offer would be greatly
> appreciated. Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-03-24 19:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-03-24 18:25 Unusual routing problem Benjamin Tompkins
2003-03-24 19:28 ` Kim Jensen [this message]
2003-03-30 19:00 ` Benjamin Tompkins
2003-03-31 16:52 ` Kim Jensen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-03-24 18:18 Benjamin Tompkins
2003-04-01 17:58 ` Matthew G. Marsh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200303242028.09150.kimj@dawn.dk \
--to=kimj@dawn.dk \
--cc=netfilter@dahanga.org \
--cc=netfilter@lists.netfilter.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox