Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 22:44:05 +0100 (MET) From: Wilko Bulte <wilko@yedi.iaf.nl> To: benedict@echonyc.com Cc: FreeBSD-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: weird natd setup, can use input on how-to Message-ID: <199801082144.WAA03457@yedi.iaf.nl> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980107170231.16843A-100000@echonyc.com> from "Snob Art Genre" at Jan 7, 98 06:05:32 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Snob Art Genre wrote... > On Wed, 7 Jan 1998, Wilko Bulte wrote: > > > I'm as far as getting ping to work from the storage to the sparc20. > > Okay, so IP is being routed from the 16.198 (production) network to the > 192.168.200 (lab) network, and back. > > > I can also get out from the sparc20 to everywhere on 16.xxx.xxx.xxx > > (gatekeeper.dec.com won't let me go further ;-) ) > > Ok. > > > What does not want to work is telnet from storage to sparc20. Natd shows > > the translations going on (with -v) but the connection times out. > > Can I see the output of natd? I haven't worked with it. Also, some > tcpdump traces would be most helpful. If you run one tcpdump on > 192.168.200.1 and another on 16.198.16.101 (the two interfaces of > storgate), we can determine exactly what's getting routed and what isn't. > > > Another problem: since wilkux is not on the same subnet as storgate I have > > to give it a default route to the router responsible for the 16.198.208 > > network. > > Huh? Is 16.198 subnetted? You neglected to mention that. ;-) Yes it is. 16.* is the Digital network BTW. > > Of course I want to set a route for 192.168.200.xxx to go thru > > storgate. Question: can I get 192.168.200.xxx to be routed at all? It is > > a RFC(I forgot) network which is supposed to be non-routed. > > Let's try and find out. Give the 16.198.208 router a (static) route to > the 192.168.200 network. Hmm, I was afraid of that. I'll have to trick/bribe the network people into doing that. I unfortunately don't control the routers. > > When I ping to sparc20 from wilkux I end up getting an 'unreachable' from > > gatekeeper.dec.com. > > There's no need for those packets to go all the way to the edge of your > network and back. Gatekeeper should never see them. That was also my assumption. > > Apparantly the router handling wilkux default route *does* try to route > > the 192.168.200.xxx addresses. This also means the packets never arrive > > at storgate. > > Sounds right to me. > > > What are the chances of ever getting this to work? I'm not a network expert > > so I sure could use some help. > > Since it looks like storgate is routing those RFC 1918 addresses, there's > no reason known to me why this setup shouldn't work. I'll start talking to our network guys. _ ______________________________________________________________________ | / o / / _ Bulte email: wilko @ yedi.iaf.nl http://www.tcja.nl/~wilko |/|/ / / /( (_) Arnhem, The Netherlands - Do, or do not. There is no 'try' --------------- Support your local daemons: run [Free,Net,Open]BSD Unix --
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199801082144.WAA03457>