|On Thu, 20 Jun 2002 10:48:01 +0100
|Antony Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
| about Re: Completely NAT an ISP: A practical possibility?:

 >> On Tuesday 18 June 2002 11:50 pm, Ramin Alidousti wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 05:22:03PM -0300, Rodrigo Senra wrote:
> > > > This would break lots of protocols. How would the clients put up with
> > > > this broken functionality?
> > >
> > > Good observation. Yes it breaks some (all not NAT-able), and when this is
> > > used clients have to live up with the limitations. But as I said, for the
> > > time being this is used to accomodate a multiple-ISP cenario where
> > > clients need basically HTTP, FTP, and less percentage of H.323.
> >
> > Just a small note. FTP is one of the protocols that would break...
> 
> This is, of course, assuming that they only do "simple NAT", rather than 
> implementing netfilter + associated helper modules inside the ISP....
> 

Thank you Antony.

Indeed we were discussing different things! I believe now that Ramin
made reference that protocols would break due to a lack of "connection
conntracking" withou which packets couldn't suffer NAT properly. We have
implemented a rudimentar NAT+conntrack kernel 2.2 patch, because by the time
we netfilter/iptables was not available in all its glory ;o).
What we did was to use a priority queue and hashtables to implement full
NAT to FTP and H.323 only (our immediate needs by then).

We've upgraded the solution to use netfilter/iptables last year.

regards,
Senra 

-- 
Rodrigo Senra         
MSc Computer Engineer   (GPr Sistemas Ltda)     [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~921234  (LinUxer 217.243) (ICQ 114477550)

Reply via email to