No NAT anywhere (actually there s one in the central firewall to make packet
coming from 192.168.195 to 10.13 looking like coming from 10.13 so shorewall
machine answer back through eth0, but thats a workaround because I couldn't
get PBR doing what I want).
Le 27 juillet 2017 21:16:17 GMT+02:00, Tom Eastep <[email protected]> a
écrit :
>On 07/27/2017 11:57 AM, Adam Cécile wrote:
>> On 07/27/2017 08:51 PM, Tom Eastep wrote:
>>> On 07/27/2017 10:12 AM, Adam Cécile wrote:
>>>> On 07/27/2017 06:39 PM, Tom Eastep wrote:
>>>>>> From the routing rules you posted above, the 'main' table is
>>>>>> traversed
>>>>>> before BPR is used, and the 'main' table will route packets to
>>>>>> 192.168.195.0 out of eth1.
>>>> Sounds like the root of the issue to me !
>>> But do you really think that it is a problem?
>>>
>>> -Tom
>> Yes because any machine from 192.168.195.0/24 network cannot use the
>new
>> 10.13 address, and that the one that will stay, 192.168.195.227 must
>go
>> asap.
>>
>
>Please ignore my last post. Replies to 192.168.195.0/24 from the 10.13
>address are being sent out of the 192.168.195.227 interface. Are they
>getting their source IP address rewritten by SNAT/MASQ? Is that the
>problem? Otherwise, I don't understand why communication is breaking.
>
>-Tom
>--
>Tom Eastep \ Q: What do you get when you cross a mobster with
>Shoreline, \ an international standard?
>Washington, USA \ A: Someone who makes you an offer you can't
>http://shorewall.org \ understand
> \_______________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users
