[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       lartc
Subject:    [LARTC] NAT and policy routing?
From:       Brian Capouch <brianc () palaver ! net>
Date:       2004-01-29 18:48:45
Message-ID: 4019558D.5030706 () palaver ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

I'm confused about what might be going on here, and hope someone will be 
able to suggest a way of the thicket for me.

I am using a rule to route a private network to the outside world:

# ip rule show
from 192.168.1.0/24 lookup bc-routes

On the router box I have this rule (public IP obfuscated):

SNAT all  --  192.168.1.0/24  0.0.0.0/0  to:111.11.11.1111

I can ssh out of any of the boxes on 192.168.1.0 just fine, and the 
other end sees me coming in from the public address above.  But the 
Vonage phones that are on that network somehow seem to be eluding the rule:

> 14:10:15.050505 192.168.1.11.5062 > 64.157.171.19.5061: udp 430 [tos 0x68]
> 14:10:15.284244 192.168.1.9.5063 > 12.144.47.27.5060: udp 412 [tos 0x68]
> 14:10:16.443637 192.168.1.6.5060 > 12.144.47.27.5060: udp 411 [tos 0x68]

I know the ssh sessions are TCP and the Vonage units are (obviously) 
using UDP.  I wonder what I'm misunderstanding?

Earlier, on another machine that was using "plain old routing" instead 
of the rule/table method, the Vonage units worked just fine.

Thanks in advance for any help that might be out there.

B.
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]