From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 7 19:33:58 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A31BE1E4 for ; Tue, 7 May 2013 19:33:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eric@vangyzen.net) Received: from aussmtpmrkps320.us.dell.com (aussmtpmrkps320.us.dell.com [143.166.224.254]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 775C6DF5 for ; Tue, 7 May 2013 19:33:58 +0000 (UTC) X-Loopcount0: from 64.238.244.148 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,629,1363150800"; d="scan'208";a="27593566" Message-ID: <518956F7.6030508@vangyzen.net> Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 14:33:11 -0500 From: Eric van Gyzen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130413 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matthias Apitz Subject: Re: ppp(8) and inbound IP connections References: <20130507181345.GA992@tiny.Sisis.de> <51894B52.2050903@rewt.org.uk> <20130507185623.GA1115@tiny.Sisis.de> <5189534D.4020605@vangyzen.net> <20130507192433.GA1304@tiny.Sisis.de> In-Reply-To: <20130507192433.GA1304@tiny.Sisis.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Joe Holden X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 19:33:58 -0000 On 05/07/2013 14:24, Matthias Apitz wrote: > El día Tuesday, May 07, 2013 a las 02:17:33PM -0500, Eric van Gyzen escribió: > >>> Ofc, the provider must NAT somehow my local addr behind some routable >>> valid IP addr, in our case 82.113.99.104; without this nothing would >>> come back, even when the 1st SYN was from my side; the question is, why >>> they do not manage the NAT table so any SYN to 82.113.99.104 is sent to >>> my ppp link; >>> >>> or if they do send it, and my ppp config is wrong? >> Most likely, multiple customers' local addresses are NATed to the same >> routable address, so the router can't know which customer to chose for a >> new incoming connection. De-NATing of incoming packets for existing >> sessions is done via per-connection state-tracking, which of course >> doesn't exist for a new incoming connection. > That is my understanding as well, but why they claim that they do > support incoming connections? Miscommunication, perhaps? Eric