Search Results

Search found 1275 results on 51 pages for 'nat weiss'.

Page 2/51 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Linux + IPTables + NAT = some http hosts unreachable.

    - by Daniel
    Hi. I've set up dead simple NAT: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.1.0/24 -o ppp0 -j MASQUERADE Everything works almost ok. Almost. The problem I've expirienced is some hosts are not reachable by NAT clients, i.e. there's http://code.jquery.com/jquery-1.4.2.min.js - I can download it from server, but in case of NAT client download stalls on connection stage. I thought its FFs fault, but wget has the same issue. I didn't find any logs/messages that can shed some light on this situtation. Any ideas what's going on? Maybe some tricky thing in sysclt is causing this? P.S. 3/3 client boxes are expiriencing this issue. This is definitely server trouble.

    Read the article

  • Cisco NAT + IPSec + Web Server Configuration Question

    - by zagman76
    Hello - I currently have a Cisco 881W, and it is configured with one of our static IPs to do basic NAT for the network. We also have a web server that needs it's own IP. I configured the NAT for the 2nd IP, however now traffic through our IPSec VPN doesn't route to the web server properly (well, it routes to the internet, rather than through the Tunnel). I followed the instructions here: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk583/tk372/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080094634.shtml But now the outbound NAT doesn't seem to be working properly - it keeps going to the NAT of the Cisco, and not the designated IP address. If anyone can assist, I would appreciate it greatly. Let me know what you need, and I'll get it to you! Thanks!

    Read the article

  • NAT and NGINX on the same server

    - by Morten
    I'm setting up a VPC cluster for my collaborative todo list application www.getdoneapp.com. To have my servers on the private network I need a NAT server so my servers on the private network can connect to the internet to receive updates and what not. The NAT server will consume an elastic IP address, so I'm wondering if I can just have that NAT server run nginx to direct traffic to my internal servers for HTTP. So the question is, is it a bad idea to run NGINX and NAT on the same server, or should I go for consuming 2 elastic IP addresses?

    Read the article

  • Connecting to network device behind NAT from local LAN using the external port and IP

    - by lumbric
    I noticed at several different LANs connected to the Internet through a NAT the following phenomena. There is a server in the LAN and there is a port forwarding to reach this server also from outside the LAN through the NAT. E.g. consider a LAN with the address 192.168.0.* and a SSH server at 192.168.0.2 with port 22 and a forwarding from port 2222 at the NAT 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.0.2:22. If the NAT's external IP is 44.33.22.11, one can connect to the SSH server through 44.33.22.11:2222. Surprisingly this works only from outside the LAN. If one tries to connect to 44.33.22.11:2222 from behind the NAT, there is no answer. Of course one could simply use 192.168.0.2:22, but often it is simpler to use the external IP. The typical use case for me is the configuration on a laptop computer. Usually the user uses any arbitrary Internet connection to connect to his home or office server, but sometimes he will use also the LAN to connect to it and it would be annoying to have to different configurations or bookmarks. Why does it fail to connect from inside the LAN? Is there any good work around?

    Read the article

  • Linux, some packets are not being NAT

    - by user70932
    Hi, I'm trying to NAT HTTP traffic, I'm new to this and facing some issues. What i'm trying to do is NAT client HTTP requests to a webserver. CLIENT - NAT BOX - WEBSERVER When the client open the IP of the NAT BOX, the request should be pass to the web server. But I'm getting "HTTP request sent, awaiting response..." and then wait serveral minutes before the request is done. Looking at the tcpdump output, it looks like the first Syn packet on (10:48:54) is being NAT but not the second, third, fourth... ACK or PSH packets, and wait until (10:52:04) it starts NAT again on the ACK packet. The iptables command I'm using is: iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -i eth0 --dport 80 \ -j DNAT --to-destination WEBSERVER I'm wondering what could have caused this behavior? Thanks alot. 10:48:54.907861 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16395, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 48) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: S, cksum 0x6019 (correct), 1589600740:1589600740(0) win 5840 <mss 1460,nop,wscale 8> 10:48:54.907874 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 48, id 16395, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 48) CLIENT.61736 > WEBSERVER.http: S, cksum 0xb5d7 (correct), 1589600740:1589600740(0) win 5840 <mss 1460,nop,wscale 8> 10:48:55.102696 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16397, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: ., cksum 0x2727 (correct), ack 2950613896 win 23 10:48:55.102963 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16399, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 160) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: P 0:120(120) ack 1 win 23 10:48:58.103078 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16401, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 160) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: P 0:120(120) ack 1 win 23 10:48:58.366344 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16403, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: ., cksum 0x26af (correct), ack 1 win 23 10:49:04.103204 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16405, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 160) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: P 0:120(120) ack 1 win 23 10:49:04.363943 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16407, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: ., cksum 0x26af (correct), ack 1 win 23 10:49:16.101583 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16409, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 160) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: P 0:120(120) ack 1 win 23 10:49:16.363475 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16411, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: ., cksum 0x26af (correct), ack 1 win 23 10:49:40.100796 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16413, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 160) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: P 0:120(120) ack 1 win 23 10:49:40.563898 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16415, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: ., cksum 0x26af (correct), ack 1 win 23 10:50:28.099396 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16417, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 160) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: P 0:120(120) ack 1 win 23 10:50:28.761678 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16419, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: ., cksum 0x26af (correct), ack 1 win 23 10:52:04.093668 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16421, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 160) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: P 0:120(120) ack 1 win 23 10:52:04.093678 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 48, id 16421, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 160) CLIENT.61736 > WEBSERVER.http: P 1589600741:1589600861(120) ack 2950613896 win 23 10:52:04.291021 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16423, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: ., cksum 0x25d3 (correct), ack 217 win 27 10:52:04.291028 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 48, id 16423, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > WEBSERVER.http: ., cksum 0x7b91 (correct), ack 217 win 27 10:52:04.300708 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16425, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: ., cksum 0x253c (correct), ack 368 win 27 10:52:04.300714 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 48, id 16425, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > WEBSERVER.http: ., cksum 0x7afa (correct), ack 368 win 27 10:52:04.301417 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16427, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: F, cksum 0x253b (correct), 120:120(0) ack 368 win 27 10:52:04.301438 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 48, id 16427, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > WEBSERVER.http: F, cksum 0x7af9 (correct), 120:120(0) ack 368 win 27 10:52:04.498875 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 49, id 16429, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > NATBOX.http: ., cksum 0x253a (correct), ack 369 win 27 10:52:04.498881 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 48, id 16429, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) CLIENT.61736 > WEBSERVER.http: ., cksum 0x7af8 (correct), ack 369 win 27

    Read the article

  • Endian Destination NAT

    - by Ben Swinburne
    I have installed Endian Community Firewall 2.3 and am clearly misunderstanding/doing something wrong with it. I'm trying to create some destination NAT rules to allow incoming connections to various services within the network. Router - RED I/F - x.x.x.x Router - GREEN I/F - 192.168.11.253 ECF - RED I/F - 192.168.11.254/24 ECF - GREEN I/F - 192.168.12.254/24 Target server - 192.168.12.1 Please ignore the haphazard choice of subnets and addresses- I'm trying to quickly plop Endian into an existing network before a complete rework in 6-12 months so for now. Everything works except destination NAT, so outgoing connections are fine, the routes between the two subnets are OK etc. I want to create various incoming NATs but let's take for the sake of argument, SMTP port 25 from the Internet to Target server 192.168.12.1. I've tried almost every combination of options in the Destination NAT section to achieve this and clearly am doing something wrong. I suspect my confusion must be somewhere in the Access From and/or Target section. The rest seems OK Filter Policy = Allow Service = SMTP Protocol = TCP Port = 25 Translate to type = IP DNAT Policy = NAT Insert IP = 192.168.12.1 Port Range = 25 Enabled = Checked Position = First I can't work out what I'm doing wrong, or am I doing it right and it's just not working!? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • RRAS NAT not working on a certain computer

    - by legenden
    This is driving me crazy. I have a virtualized W2K8 server running RRAS. Every other computer or server on the network can access the internet through the NAT except one. On one server, it just won't work. I can ping the ip address of the NAT gateway just fine, and everything else works. (SMB, etc) DNS, which is hosted by the same server, also works just fine. I have even reinstalled the OS on the problem server and it still doesn't work. Recap of the steps I tried: There are 3 network cards in the server, I tried every one and different switch ports. Not a hardware problem. Reinstalled W2K8 R2 on server with the problem, didn't help. Tried the IP of the internet gateway directly - this did work (!). But I need NAT to work. All firewalls are disabled. Removed computer from domain, deleted computer membership in Active Directory Users and Computers and added it back. Disabled all other network adapters and set a static ip and specified the gateway ip manually. When I tracert a public IP, the first hop (or any other hop) comes up as: C:\>tracert www.google.com Tracing route to www.l.google.com [209.85.225.106] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 * * * Request timed out. 2 * * * Request timed out. From a different computer, on which NAT works, the first hop comes up as: tracert www.google.com Tracing route to www.l.google.com [209.85.225.105] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 <1 ms * <1 ms xxxx [10.5.1.1] This is the most bizarre problem I ever came across, and I realize that it's a long shot asking it here given all the details, but I'm pulling my hair out. Maybe someone has an idea...

    Read the article

  • How to stop NAT dropping idle connections?

    - by WGH
    I have a TCP connection that can be idle for many hours. The traffic is flowing from the server to the client only. One might say it's kind of push notification. My home router, however, tends to drop the connection silently after 20 minutes (the value of /proc/sys/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_tcp_timeout_established). The server detects the loss once it tries to send anything (I assume it receives RST from the router itself). As client never sends anything, it never detects the loss. RFC 5382 "NAT Behavioral Requirements for TCP" states the following: A NAT can check if an endpoint for a session has crashed by sending a TCP keep-alive packet and receiving a TCP RST packet in response. It makes sense. It's much more effective than sending keep-alives by the host itself (as only NAT knows its own timeout). And probably not hard to implement. Is there any NAT solutions implementing this? It would be great if there was a way to enable this in iptables.

    Read the article

  • Secure NAT setup with iptables

    - by TheBigB
    I have Debian running device that needs to act as an internet-gateway. On top of that I want to provide a firewall that not only blocks inbound traffic, but also outbound traffic. And I figured iptables should be able to do the job. The problem: I've configured NAT properly (I think?), but once I set the default policy to DROP and add rules to for instance allow HTTP traffic from inside the LAN, HTTP is not going through. So basically my rules don't seem to work. Below is the initialization script that I use for iptables. The device has two NICs, respectively eth0 (the WAN interface) and eth1 (the LAN interface). echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward # Flush tables iptables -F iptables -t nat -F # Set policies iptables -P INPUT DROP iptables -P OUTPUT DROP # NAT iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # Allow outbound HTTP from LAN? iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT Can anyone shed some light on this?

    Read the article

  • Reverse NAT Setup for Hyper-V on Win 2008 R2

    - by sukru
    I'm trying to setup a Linux server behind a Windows Hyper-V host that will help supply some of the services (SSH, HTTPS, etc). However getting RRAS configured for reverse NAT (port forwarding) turned out to be a non trivial task. As a staring point, I tried forwarding port 22 (SSH) to the virtual machine. The virtual machine is on a public interface (i.e.: it also has a visible IP on the same network as the host). On RRAS management console I tried to add a rule, by adding "Local Area Connection" to NAT pool (Public Interface - Enable Nat), and an incoming rule for port 22 - :22. I also tried with the same port enabled on Windows Firewall (and not). The NAT management page tells there are "1 mappings" and "30+ Outbound packets transleted". However all other counters (Inbound packets translated, and respective rejected ones) are always zero. (I'm trying to access the server from an external machine). I can directly access the service if I give the VM's public IP, but not the host's one. Is there a way to enable this on RRAS?

    Read the article

  • Setting up Windows 2008 with VPN and NAT

    - by Benson
    I have a Windows 2008 box set up with VPN, and that works quite well. NPS is used to validate the VPN clients, who are able to access the private address of the server, once connected. I can't for the life of me get NAT working for the VPN clients, though. I've added NAT as a routing protocol, and set the one on in the VPN address pool as private, and the other as public - but it still won't NAT connections when I add a route through the VPN server's IP on the client side (route add SomeInternetIp IpOfPrivateInterfaceOnServer). I know I can reach the server's private interface (which happens to be 10.2.2.1) with remote desktop client, so I can't think of any issues with the VPN.

    Read the article

  • Setting up Windows 2008 with VPN and NAT

    - by Benson
    I have a Windows 2008 box set up with VPN, and that works quite well. NPS is used to validate the VPN clients, who are able to access the private address of the server, once connected. I can't for the life of me get NAT working for the VPN clients, though. I've added NAT as a routing protocol, and set the one on in the VPN address pool as private, and the other as public - but it still won't NAT connections when I add a route through the VPN server's IP on the client side (route add SomeInternetIp IpOfPrivateInterfaceOnServer). I know I can reach the server's private interface (which happens to be 10.2.2.1) with remote desktop client, so I can't think of any issues with the VPN.

    Read the article

  • Iptables massive 1:1 NAT

    - by TiFFolk
    I have to connect two LANs: LAN1: 10.10.0.0/16 and LAN2: 192.168.0.0/16. I can't do simple routing, because 192.168.0.0/16 net is prohibited in LAN1, so I am thinking of using Full cone nat (1:1) to translate 192.168.x.y/16 to 10.11.x.y/16. Each translation is done by this rules: iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -d 10.11.0.0/16 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.0.0/16 iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 192.168.0.0/16 -j SNAT --to-source 10.11.0.0/16 But I will have to enter 254*254*2 rules, what will, I think, result in enormous performance degradation. So, is there a way to write such one-to-one translation with minimum number of rules?

    Read the article

  • Can't bring NAT to work

    - by user31738
    Hello, I bought a D-link DIR-300 wireless router and i can't bring NAT to work, i have an ssh and http service i need to forward to the internet. My connection is as follows: I have an ADSL connection, i'm using a ADSL ethernet modem connected and working, it doesnt let me put it on bridge mode. I have my router connected to my adsl modem through ethernet, it gets its ip through DHCP (and i'ts always the same) I have a desktop computer running linux with apache and openssh configured and working, it has fixed ip. I configured the NAT in the modem forwarding port 22 from the router ip to the internet. In the router i setup NAT forwarding port 22 from the desktop computer fixed ip to out there. This setup already worked with a fonera i had before, can anyone help me with this or tell me what kind of tests do i need to do? How can i test if the router is forwarding ports correctly before the modem?

    Read the article

  • faking NAT with a VMware distributed switch across multiple hosts

    - by romant
    I need to construct a NAT for certain machines within the network. Wish to do this with dvSwitch - as it seems the logical way of attacking the problem as in this scenario there's just under 30 hosts. In order for the NAT'ed VM's to have access to the 'real' network. I am providing a 'router' VM, which will have access to the WAN/outside network, and also act as the DHCP server for the NAT'ed machines. Problem Space When the machines connected to the NAT interface and the router are on the same host, then they get an IP from the router VM, and work perfectly (routed outside). Unfortunately machines on other Hosts that are connected to the dvSwitch do not get an IP and further tcpdump shows no network data getting through across the hosts within the dvSwitch. Has anyone achieved a NAT solution using a dvSwitch before that they could share?! Thank you. EDIT: Including the diagram.

    Read the article

  • How can I setup a Firewall without NAT?

    - by SRobertJames
    We have 16 IP addresses from our ISP, and are setting up a SonicWall Firewall. I'd like to have the SonicWall do NAT for the LAN, but act as a firewall only (no NAT) for the servers which are using some of the 16 addresses. How do I set this up? If I set the WAN's subnet to include the 16 IPs, the SonicWall won't route the traffic to the LAN interface. Should I set the WAN subnet to only include the ones we are dedicating for NAT, and then keep the others on the LAN? Related point: How can I set multiple IP addresses for a SonicWall LAN interface?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to host a web server from behind a NAT

    - by iamrohitbanga
    My PC is behind a NAT router that has a public IP address. If I want to host a website then I believe I need a domain name which I can purchase from some site which would pledge to resolve all DNS requests for that domain name and send the IP address of my NAT router (assuming I do not want to host my domain name on their servers). Now I want to host a web server on my computer. What changes should be done to the NAT router's configuration to forward all HTTP requests for example.com to my PC in the internal network. Is the above strategy correct? Is it commonly used?

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2003: Nat Port Forwarding Not Working

    - by jM2.me
    The setup is following: Internet (108.99.XXX.XX) <- Windows Server 2003 (10.0.0.1) <- Switch <- Office Computers (10.0.0.100-200 some static routes some manual some automatic) Windows Server has NAT installed on it and two network interfaces are configured properly. The problem is, whenever I try to forward port 80 (or any other) from office computer (lets say 10.0.0.100), it fails. Nic #1 Settings: All settings are obtained from ISP Nic #2 Settings: Set manually IP: 10.0.0.1 Mask: 255.255.255.0 Nat Server is configured to automatically assign IP addresses to private network. Settings are: IP: 10.0.0.0 Mask: 255.255.255.0 Forwarding was done in Routing and Remote Access (local) - IP Routing - NAT/Basic Firewall - Local Area Connection (right click_properties) - services and ports - Web Server HTTP - Private Address: 10.0.0.100 SO what is causing the problem of failure to forward any port from other computer inside private network?

    Read the article

  • nat with iptables, re-connecting fail within about 3 minutes

    - by xpu
    i constructed a nat with iptables, as following: echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward iptables -t nat -I PREROUTING -p tcp --dport 9000 -j DNAT --to xx.xx.xx.xx iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -p tcp --dport 9000 -j MASQUERADE service iptables save service iptables restart the configuration worked fine, but there was a problem when i disconnected and tried to reconnect again, connection will be refused within about 2~3 minutes, after that, things go fine again. what was the problem? how do i make it to accept new connection after the old one break?

    Read the article

  • faking NAT with a VMware distributed switch across multiple hosts

    - by romant
    Have a VM that will act as the router, and will be connected to both networks (NAT + 'real'). I spread the distributed switch across the hosts, although any VM that is not on the same physical host as the router/dhcpd simply doesn't get an IP. So its obviously my dvSwitch config. Has anyone achieved a NAT solution using a dvSwitch before that they could share?! Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Percentage of computers on Internet behind a NAT?

    - by Mr.M
    I'm in a process of developing a server application and I would like to know if there are some numbers (or experience from people) on how many computers are behind the NAT on the Internet? Since my application is supposed to be a small server, being forced to implement UPNP support and TCP hole-punching with an external server may sway my determination, especially if more than 80% of the Internet is behind NAT.

    Read the article

  • IP NAT pool range

    - by hfranco
    When is it necessary to setup a pool of more than one address? So if I have this ip pool range: ip nat pool demo 72.32.11.65 72.32.11.66 netmask 255.255.255.252 What's the difference if I just have one address? ip nat pool demo 72.32.11.65 72.32.11.65 netmask 255.255.255.252

    Read the article

  • Postrouting rule in NAT table

    - by codingfreak
    Hi I have a strange question regarding NAT using iptables. When I do SNAT in a postrouting chain in NAT table at the end of the rule should I give -J ACCEPT? I see counters on the postrouting rule getting incremented but no packet leaving the machine. So does it mean the packet is DROPPED automatically?

    Read the article

  • Server 2008 NAT Internet Not Working

    - by Jack
    I'm trying to set up Routing and Remote Access on Windows Server 2008 R2, I have a network connection that I want to share the internet from to another private network. The server has two NICs which are configured as follows: External NIC (Dynamically assigned by ISP) IP:10.175.4.150 Subnet:255.255.192.0 Gateway:10.175.0.1 DNS:10.175.0.1 Internal NIC IP:172.16.254.1 Subnet:255.255.255.0 Gateway:None DNS:None I have set the external NIC to be the public interface and enabled NAT on it in the RRAS MMC and set the internal NIC to be a private interface. I have also set up the DNS forwarding or whatever it is in the NAT section. From a client (IP:172.16.254.2) I can ping the server and access files on it, when I try to browse the web with the default gateway set to the internal NIC ip I end up getting a 404 page which is returned from the ISPs default gateway. I'm guessing it's something to do with the double NAT possibly. Trying to ping the ISPs default gateway from a private network client just times out as does accessing it directly. I've disabled and reconfigured RRAS multiple times and that doesn't seem to have made a difference, so can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong? Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >