On Wed, November 23, 2005 09:15, Darren Reed wrote: > In some mail from Allen, sie said: >> >> >> I've been using ipnat for quite a while on FreeBSD, and haven't seen >> anything like this before, so here I am on the list.. >> >> I have a rule: >> rdr fxp1 192.168.1.10/32 port 8000-8100 udp -> 10.0.0.10 port 8000 udp >> >> fxp1 has 192.168.1.10, and is in 192.168.1.0/24. >> fxp0 has 10.0.0.1, and is in 10.0.0.0/24. > >> tcpdump on fxp1 shows incoming traffic that should match the rdr rule >> "IP >> 192.168.1.20.8014 > 192.168.1.10.8014: UDP, length:172" > > What are you expecting to happen?
I was expecting the NAT to take place, and a connection to be listed in "ipnat -l". ;) > > The tcpdump output is correct. You should see different output on fxp0. > Instead what I saw was no NAT rule being connected, and no associated traffic out of fxp0. Doesn't make any sense, I know, but that's why I'm asking. The other NAT rules I have, which are identical except for the port they're using, all work fine. There are only two differences between the rules: - the port/portrange being used. - the fact that the packets coming in have the same source and destination port The application is a Panasonic MGCP IP phone system, using (Client <-> Server) UDP ports: 9301 <-> 9300 2427 <-> 2727 80xx <-> 80xx 80xx is in the range 8000-8069, and source/dest port is always the same. I dropped ipnat out of the loop and tried it with natd, same result, hmmm.
