> I enabled CONFIG_IP_TRANSPARENT_PROXY in kernel
> and echo "1" >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_dynaddr,
> but I still loose the first packet.
> linux/Documentation/networking/ip_dynaddr.txt:
>
> IP dynamic address hack-port v0.03
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> This stuff allows diald ONESHOT connections to get established by
> dynamically changing packet source address (and socket's if local procs).
> It is implemented for TCP diald-box connections(1) and IP_MASQuerading(2).
>
> If enabled[*] and forwarding interface has changed:
> 1) Socket (and packet) source address is rewritten ON RETRANSMISSIONS
> while in SYN_SENT state (diald-box processes).
> 2) Out-bounded MASQueraded source address changes ON OUTPUT (when
> internal host does retransmission) until a packet from outside is
> received by the tunnel.
>
> This is specially helpful for auto dialup links (diald), where the
> ``actual'' outgoing address is unknown at the moment the link is
> going up. So, the *same* (local AND masqueraded) connections requests that
> bring the link up will be able to get established.
>
>
> What else should I do?
>
Yes, That is exactly the same question here. And I am fighting with that
since a while.
There seem to be quite a few different opinions out there whether diald with
a dynamic IP address is supposed to be working or not ... and I am confused.
There are people pointing to the diald FAQ which states that it is normal
(and probably won't change?) to lose the first packets due to the nature of
masquerading but other users seem not to have that problem just by using
echo "1" >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_dynaddr?
I wanted to use a Linux box with diald in different small networks for their
Internet access needs but I can't see how to use it for end users with that
limitation? Do I really have to add a small router to these networks or is
there someone with more ideas to help us with that?
Michael Doerner
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-diald" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
