From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Wed Jun 13 17:22:58 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08CA5101FC68 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 17:22:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kudzu@tenebras.com) Received: from mail-qk0-x232.google.com (mail-qk0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AFD76F038 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 17:22:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kudzu@tenebras.com) Received: by mail-qk0-x232.google.com with SMTP id c131-v6so1979543qkb.0 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 10:22:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tenebras-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=cFC39+OMAiXZdH12Vuiljj0dcQXYmJ2GoHASfP6OwgA=; b=LZvzN/YmhgLdRIVcbYIcJNlUQX10p3pHDVP7cXevPt+RojTIMUh0Px3fuAAK9YcSyk 3K20+cE/63A8AQU/Km019dZV2Up0hYeUeIfhbybFoRk9gs4MqNnzKVmGVIPVDRff5neR ys43Dlp9rcHtExPgFZEIA1T54KQ3fz5UVwGk+RmrFhT0OEb1dRnUO7eFmgKFuBhuInJ1 Pz8CAolTan7OV7T8iRZk3ybccNXMIK7wh+T4rkbnqCjwHM6PqsjUmBZhb0yjhqKO46yI 5d9gAfBc0ALimUBQth1Xa/ETsUQrJK4OLIeGpVs/J7zUIQ3yMS3aF6QdDuwzBiS60YQo hyVQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=cFC39+OMAiXZdH12Vuiljj0dcQXYmJ2GoHASfP6OwgA=; b=mptA5Frucx0UAB7ATq0ToJoHG+k1LRxElgY7+mCMOS/S8jOWzNfolhq++tC9/7MBzd q9HcPX398m8qJeVIRiAyKJQeM7mj0FyzRn2KoNTWW895g8p7PZ7tFIqiVpW5oFjfv9BF FDaU37TbUDBVp/bRiC7GvSz46+6rf8pz8X4xgUS30SZsltoIaF0hs8LTfN01RPxMc1EX AN8EJtbrpea0bxFInLWrzl8ETt1zpdmL3hdm4pND2QqmsD98B3de9fX91ft6yQNTGhAW l76xKzPoBfg9/IMENwD5ajHqpJxXtW+SNfRX7iHpYWryZL+XLHJa5r2MyxwgNBYPd75g S8eg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E2FBGDSpgOloG1LCp1W8qpBF+V2edB5jpYcT8dU0ewsacyUuhUb fALaBG9D1Z5fhzWFqBVdQX/GbkL8F3tyc8+r1SRJLTms X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKKuG6uE5WmaA+QYYJO4iDkpUVHcTN2j5valB303M6a6yoG6ksolne918LBnVDEFMxzxPDVRZhmSRwJorJaToQo= X-Received: by 2002:a37:108f:: with SMTP id 15-v6mr5098545qkq.345.1528910576789; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 10:22:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:ac8:297d:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 10:22:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Michael Sierchio Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 10:22:56 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: In-kernel NAT [ipfw] dropping large UDP return packets To: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.26 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 17:22:58 -0000 On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:16 AM, Jeff Kletsky wrote: When a T-Mobile "femto-cell" is trying to establish its IPv4, IPSEC tunnel > to the T-Mobile provisioning servers, the reassembled, 4640-byte return > packet is silently dropped by the in-kernel NAT, even though it "matches" > the outbound packet from less than 100 ms prior. Do you have a 'reass' rule before applying nat on inbound traffic? - M --=20 "Well," Brahma said, "even after ten thousand explanations, a fool is no wiser, but an intelligent person requires only two thousand five hundred." - The Mah=C4=81bh=C4=81rata