natd -redirect_port question

2006-01-01 Thread Laurence Sanford
I have natd set up on a 4.10 box to get the rest of my network on the 
internet. I have an application that requires connections to be able to 
be established on a specific port. The problem is, sometimes I run this 
app on system A and sometimes on system B. The port stays the same. So 
in my rc.conf I have included in natd_flags -redirect_port tcp 
systemA:port port ; currently if I want to use the app on system B I'm 
having to reboot the natd box. Obviously this seems silly, however, I've 
found that trying to reset this information using a command line like: 
natd -n dc0 -redirect_port systemB:port port results in an errror 
stating redirect can't bind to that port, because it's already in use. 
I'm convinced I'm overlooking an easy way to change this redirect on the 
fly without having to reboot the natd box. Anyone care to point me the 
right direction? Thanks in advance.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: natd -redirect_port question

2006-01-01 Thread Matt Emmerton
 I have natd set up on a 4.10 box to get the rest of my network on the
 internet. I have an application that requires connections to be able to
 be established on a specific port. The problem is, sometimes I run this
 app on system A and sometimes on system B. The port stays the same. So
 in my rc.conf I have included in natd_flags -redirect_port tcp
 systemA:port port ; currently if I want to use the app on system B I'm
 having to reboot the natd box. Obviously this seems silly, however, I've
 found that trying to reset this information using a command line like:
 natd -n dc0 -redirect_port systemB:port port results in an errror
 stating redirect can't bind to that port, because it's already in use.
 I'm convinced I'm overlooking an easy way to change this redirect on the
 fly without having to reboot the natd box. Anyone care to point me the
 right direction? Thanks in advance.

If you already have natd running, then you need to stop it first before
starting it up again.

--
Matt Emmerton

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: natd -redirect_port

2004-05-17 Thread Christian Hiris
On Saturday 15 May 2004 18:56, JJB wrote:
 You are wrong also. The boot time message that displays about the
 ipfw module being loaded is incorrect. I filed an PR on that in 5.1
 and was told by developers that message is misleading, that the
 module is fully enabled with nat and logging, so I tested and indeed
 nat and logging is really in the loadable module.  It's my
 understanding the boot time message that displays about the ipfw
 module being loaded that says everything is disabled will be
 corrected in 5.3.  What is in the 5.2.1 ipfw module I do not know.
 My advice is to test ipfw module before adding ipfw option
 statements to kernel. That's why the 5.x versions are development
 versions, things change all the time until that get corrected before
 be coming stable releases. This is all new because ipfw2 replaced
 ipfw at the 5.1 version I believe.  Just think about it, why have an
 loadable module if all the options are turned off, it makes the
 module useless.  Ipfilter's loadable module is full function with
 nat and logging why should the ipfw module be any different? It's
 just that stupid message that has been misleading users all this
 time just like it did to me. If nat and logging is missing from the
 ipfw loadable module in 5.2.1 then submit another PR to remind then
 it needs to be corrected. Nat and logging are the most used options
 of ipfw, it's just plain stupid not to have then included in the
 standard module.

If a user wants ipfw to issue the correct initial divert message, it's still 
required to compile ipfw into the kernel. This means 'option IPFIREWALL' is 
required as stated in the natd manual. 

Actually on 5.2-current the ipfw module doesn't know if the kernel has been 
compiled with ipdivert proto. This causes the wrong 'divert disabled' initial 
message. 
 
I will file a PR on the wrong initial divert message issue tomorrow. If the 
ipdivert proto capability could be retrieved via divcb sysctl or any other 
mechanism, it might become possible that the ipfw kld could issue the correct 
divert message.  
Disabling of the divert message in case the ipfw has been compiled as kld 
could be a simpler solution.



 -Original Message-
 From: Micheal Patterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 11:38 AM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Christian Hiris;
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: Anthony Philipp
 Subject: Re: natd -redirect_port


 - Original Message -
 From: JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Christian Hiris [EMAIL PROTECTED];
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: Anthony Philipp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 8:05 AM
 Subject: RE: natd -redirect_port

  You are wrong, you do not have to compile ipfirewall kernel

 options

  into the kernel.
  IPFW is delivered as an bootable module.
  You need this in rc.conf to enable ipfw, it will auto load the
  bootable module.
 
  # Required For IPFW  kernel firewall support
  firewall_enable=YES  # Start daemon
  firewall_script=/etc/ipfw.rules  # run my custom rules
  firewall_logging=YES# Enable events logging
 
  natd_enable=YES # Enable IPFW nat function
  natd_interface=rl0
  natd_flags=-dynamic -m -u -f /etc/natd.conf

 You're right, you don't have to recompile to use ipfw, however,
 since there
 is no divert module, the kernel will still need to be recompiled to
 enable
 divert. In order for the OP to do what they're wanting to do they
 will still
 need to recompile kernel and restart the system.

 --

 Micheal Patterson
 TSG Network Administration
 405-917-0600

 Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail message, including any
 attachments, is
 for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
 confidential
 and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure
 or
 distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,
 please
 contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the
 original
 message.

 ___
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 
Christian Hiris [EMAIL PROTECTED] | OpenPGP KeyID 0x941B6B0B 
OpenPGP-Key at hkp://wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net and http://pgp.mit.edu


pgpnzjpbaGUZp.pgp
Description: signature


RE: natd -redirect_port

2004-05-17 Thread JJB
Now wouldn't it just be better all the way around to create the IPFW
loadable module that is distributed with the system, with the
correct divert and logging options so it's not an mandatory
requirement to compile the kernel. Why make this so difficult for
the normal user?. Simpler and easier is always better than more
complicated. Look at it this way, A firewall without logging is
useless, and the majority of people who use IPFW have an lan behind
their IPFW firewall, so the sensible thing to do is distribute the
IPFW loadable module configured in an manner to address the needs of
the largest user group. As it's distributed now the loadable module
is all most completely useless so why even have one?

My personal option is the IPFW loadable module is not configured
correctly and needs to be corrected.

-Original Message-
From: Christian Hiris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 8:32 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Micheal Patterson; Anthony Philipp
Subject: Re: natd -redirect_port

On Saturday 15 May 2004 18:56, JJB wrote:
 You are wrong also. The boot time message that displays about the
 ipfw module being loaded is incorrect. I filed an PR on that in
5.1
 and was told by developers that message is misleading, that the
 module is fully enabled with nat and logging, so I tested and
indeed
 nat and logging is really in the loadable module.  It's my
 understanding the boot time message that displays about the ipfw
 module being loaded that says everything is disabled will be
 corrected in 5.3.  What is in the 5.2.1 ipfw module I do not know.
 My advice is to test ipfw module before adding ipfw option
 statements to kernel. That's why the 5.x versions are development
 versions, things change all the time until that get corrected
before
 be coming stable releases. This is all new because ipfw2 replaced
 ipfw at the 5.1 version I believe.  Just think about it, why have
an
 loadable module if all the options are turned off, it makes the
 module useless.  Ipfilter's loadable module is full function with
 nat and logging why should the ipfw module be any different? It's
 just that stupid message that has been misleading users all this
 time just like it did to me. If nat and logging is missing from
the
 ipfw loadable module in 5.2.1 then submit another PR to remind
then
 it needs to be corrected. Nat and logging are the most used
options
 of ipfw, it's just plain stupid not to have then included in the
 standard module.

If a user wants ipfw to issue the correct initial divert message,
it's still
required to compile ipfw into the kernel. This means 'option
IPFIREWALL' is
required as stated in the natd manual.

Actually on 5.2-current the ipfw module doesn't know if the kernel
has been
compiled with ipdivert proto. This causes the wrong 'divert
disabled' initial
message.

I will file a PR on the wrong initial divert message issue tomorrow.
If the
ipdivert proto capability could be retrieved via divcb sysctl or any
other
mechanism, it might become possible that the ipfw kld could issue
the correct
divert message.
Disabling of the divert message in case the ipfw has been compiled
as kld
could be a simpler solution.



 -Original Message-
 From: Micheal Patterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 11:38 AM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Christian Hiris;
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: Anthony Philipp
 Subject: Re: natd -redirect_port


 - Original Message -
 From: JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Christian Hiris [EMAIL PROTECTED];
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: Anthony Philipp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 8:05 AM
 Subject: RE: natd -redirect_port

  You are wrong, you do not have to compile ipfirewall kernel

 options

  into the kernel.
  IPFW is delivered as an bootable module.
  You need this in rc.conf to enable ipfw, it will auto load the
  bootable module.
 
  # Required For IPFW  kernel firewall support
  firewall_enable=YES  # Start daemon
  firewall_script=/etc/ipfw.rules  # run my custom rules
  firewall_logging=YES# Enable events logging
 
  natd_enable=YES # Enable IPFW nat function
  natd_interface=rl0
  natd_flags=-dynamic -m -u -f /etc/natd.conf

 You're right, you don't have to recompile to use ipfw, however,
 since there
 is no divert module, the kernel will still need to be recompiled
to
 enable
 divert. In order for the OP to do what they're wanting to do they
 will still
 need to recompile kernel and restart the system.

 --

 Micheal Patterson
 TSG Network Administration
 405-917-0600

 Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail message, including any
 attachments, is
 for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
 confidential
 and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure
 or
 distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,
 please
 contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the
 original
 message

Re: natd -redirect_port

2004-05-15 Thread Christian Hiris
On Saturday 15 May 2004 07:49, Anthony Philipp wrote:
 hello,
 im am trying to redirect various ports through my gateway, a freebsd
 machine, to other machines. when i type: natd -interface rl0 -redirect_port
 tcp 10.10.10.4:25 25
 to redirect port 25 to 10.10.10.4 on port 25 it tells me
 natd: Unable to create divert socket.: Protocol not supported
 rl0 is the external ethernet card. if i dont use -interface, it says that
 the aliasing address is not given. any help is appreciated. am i running
 freebsd 5.2-release anthony

 ___
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Natd requires 'options IPFIREWALL' and 'options IPDIVERT' in your kernel 
config. Refer to section RUNNING NATD in the natd(8) manual for some more 
info.

regards
ch

-- 
Christian Hiris [EMAIL PROTECTED] | OpenPGP KeyID 0x941B6B0B 
OpenPGP-Key at hkp://wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net and http://pgp.mit.edu


pgp1vn8BHWioG.pgp
Description: signature


RE: natd -redirect_port

2004-05-15 Thread JJB
You are wrong, you do not have to compile ipfirewall kernel options
into the kernel.
IPFW is delivered as an bootable module.
You need this in rc.conf to enable ipfw, it will auto load the
bootable module.

# Required For IPFW  kernel firewall support
firewall_enable=YES  # Start daemon
firewall_script=/etc/ipfw.rules  # run my custom rules
firewall_logging=YES# Enable events logging

natd_enable=YES # Enable IPFW nat function
natd_interface=rl0
natd_flags=-dynamic -m -u -f /etc/natd.conf



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Christian
Hiris
Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 3:06 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Anthony Philipp
Subject: Re: natd -redirect_port

On Saturday 15 May 2004 07:49, Anthony Philipp wrote:
 hello,
 im am trying to redirect various ports through my gateway, a
freebsd
 machine, to other machines. when i type: natd -interface
rl0 -redirect_port
 tcp 10.10.10.4:25 25
 to redirect port 25 to 10.10.10.4 on port 25 it tells me
 natd: Unable to create divert socket.: Protocol not supported
 rl0 is the external ethernet card. if i dont use -interface, it
says that
 the aliasing address is not given. any help is appreciated. am i
running
 freebsd 5.2-release anthony

 ___
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Natd requires 'options IPFIREWALL' and 'options IPDIVERT' in your
kernel
config. Refer to section RUNNING NATD in the natd(8) manual for
some more
info.

regards
ch

--
Christian Hiris [EMAIL PROTECTED] | OpenPGP KeyID 0x941B6B0B
OpenPGP-Key at hkp://wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net and http://pgp.mit.edu

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: natd -redirect_port

2004-05-15 Thread Micheal Patterson


- Original Message - 
From: JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Christian Hiris [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Anthony Philipp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 8:05 AM
Subject: RE: natd -redirect_port


 You are wrong, you do not have to compile ipfirewall kernel options
 into the kernel.
 IPFW is delivered as an bootable module.
 You need this in rc.conf to enable ipfw, it will auto load the
 bootable module.

 # Required For IPFW  kernel firewall support
 firewall_enable=YES  # Start daemon
 firewall_script=/etc/ipfw.rules  # run my custom rules
 firewall_logging=YES# Enable events logging

 natd_enable=YES # Enable IPFW nat function
 natd_interface=rl0
 natd_flags=-dynamic -m -u -f /etc/natd.conf


You're right, you don't have to recompile to use ipfw, however, since there
is no divert module, the kernel will still need to be recompiled to enable
divert. In order for the OP to do what they're wanting to do they will still
need to recompile kernel and restart the system.

--

Micheal Patterson
TSG Network Administration
405-917-0600

Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail message, including any attachments, is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
message.


___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


RE: natd -redirect_port

2004-05-15 Thread JJB
You are wrong also. The boot time message that displays about the
ipfw module being loaded is incorrect. I filed an PR on that in 5.1
and was told by developers that message is misleading, that the
module is fully enabled with nat and logging, so I tested and indeed
nat and logging is really in the loadable module.  It's my
understanding the boot time message that displays about the ipfw
module being loaded that says everything is disabled will be
corrected in 5.3.  What is in the 5.2.1 ipfw module I do not know.
My advice is to test ipfw module before adding ipfw option
statements to kernel. That's why the 5.x versions are development
versions, things change all the time until that get corrected before
be coming stable releases. This is all new because ipfw2 replaced
ipfw at the 5.1 version I believe.  Just think about it, why have an
loadable module if all the options are turned off, it makes the
module useless.  Ipfilter's loadable module is full function with
nat and logging why should the ipfw module be any different? It's
just that stupid message that has been misleading users all this
time just like it did to me. If nat and logging is missing from the
ipfw loadable module in 5.2.1 then submit another PR to remind then
it needs to be corrected. Nat and logging are the most used options
of ipfw, it's just plain stupid not to have then included in the
standard module.

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Patterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 11:38 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Christian Hiris;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Anthony Philipp
Subject: Re: natd -redirect_port


- Original Message -
From: JJB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Christian Hiris [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Anthony Philipp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 8:05 AM
Subject: RE: natd -redirect_port


 You are wrong, you do not have to compile ipfirewall kernel
options
 into the kernel.
 IPFW is delivered as an bootable module.
 You need this in rc.conf to enable ipfw, it will auto load the
 bootable module.

 # Required For IPFW  kernel firewall support
 firewall_enable=YES  # Start daemon
 firewall_script=/etc/ipfw.rules  # run my custom rules
 firewall_logging=YES# Enable events logging

 natd_enable=YES # Enable IPFW nat function
 natd_interface=rl0
 natd_flags=-dynamic -m -u -f /etc/natd.conf


You're right, you don't have to recompile to use ipfw, however,
since there
is no divert module, the kernel will still need to be recompiled to
enable
divert. In order for the OP to do what they're wanting to do they
will still
need to recompile kernel and restart the system.

--

Micheal Patterson
TSG Network Administration
405-917-0600

Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail message, including any
attachments, is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential
and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure
or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,
please
contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the
original
message.

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


natd -redirect_port

2004-05-14 Thread Anthony Philipp
hello,
im am trying to redirect various ports through my gateway, a freebsd machine, to other 
machines. when i type:
natd -interface rl0 -redirect_port tcp 10.10.10.4:25 25
to redirect port 25 to 10.10.10.4 on port 25 it tells me
natd: Unable to create divert socket.: Protocol not supported
rl0 is the external ethernet card. if i dont use -interface, it says that the aliasing 
address is not given. any help is appreciated. am i running freebsd 5.2-release
anthony

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


natd redirect_port changes source address?

2003-04-01 Thread Matthew Rench
I recently setup ipfw and natd on my freebsd box. I added the appropriate
command line options to make natd forward 4 tcp ports on the external
address to a box on the internal subnet. This appears to work, except that
natd is rewriting the original source address such that connections to the
internal box appear to come from my external IP address.

Is this behavior normal for natd, or do I have something configured
incorrectly? Previously, I was using a cisco 675 to do natd, and the source
address was not modified during translation. I would much prefer that the
source address not be modified, as this makes it impossible for the internal
box to know who is connecting.

Thanks for any help,
mdr
-- 
Matthew D. Rench
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]