From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Dec 8 17:50:37 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA11891 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 17:50:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from alpo.whistle.com (alpo.whistle.com [207.76.204.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA11854 for ; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 17:50:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from julian@whistle.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by alpo.whistle.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA03797; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 17:47:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from UNKNOWN(), claiming to be "current1.whistle.com" via SMTP by alpo.whistle.com, id smtpd003792; Mon Dec 8 17:46:52 1997 Message-ID: <348CA278.5656AEC7@whistle.com> Date: Mon, 08 Dec 1997 17:44:24 -0800 From: Julian Elischer Organization: Whistle Communications X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2-CURRENT i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Charles Mott CC: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: natd settings problem References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Charles Mott wrote: > > On Mon, 8 Dec 1997, Julian Elischer wrote: > > Charles Mott wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 8 Dec 1997, Valter Mazzaro wrote: > > > > My purpose is to run a video conference application (vic) between HOST1/2 and > > > > ISP. > > > > In AS a natd daemon is running. The problem is that, with the present settings, > > > > I've succeeded in running vic just between ISP and ONE host AT THE TIME!! > > > [snip] > > > > you need to run mrouted on the gateway machine, so that it takes in a > > unicast IPstream from the supplier, > > and runs multicast out through the LAN. > > > > Would you care to post an example mrouted.conf file that does this? I > can't actually test this, but I am interested to understand it better, > especially if there are any interactions with natd. > > One user has told me he has had problems with multicast through ppp -alias > and natd, but I am not sure whether this was MBONE traffic or UDP. > > Charles Mott from my understanding of it... the local network would be running on the multicast IP address which would be independent of address translation. the IP tunnel to the mbone would be running out of the 'legal' address. I believe this should "just work" julian