Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 13:16:20 -0800 From: "Crist J. Clark" <cristjc@comcast.net> To: Vincent Goupil <vgoupil@alis.com> Cc: "'freebsd-net@freebsd.org'" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: IPSec VPN & NATD (problem with alias_address vs redirect_address) Message-ID: <20031113211620.GB25920@blossom.cjclark.org> In-Reply-To: <F7D4BDA0E5A1D14B99D32C022AEB7366FE109C@alis-2k.alis.domain> References: <F7D4BDA0E5A1D14B99D32C022AEB7366FE109C@alis-2k.alis.domain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 12:46:24PM -0500, Vincent Goupil wrote:
> I setup a firewall with ipfw2 and natd on freebsd 4.9 release.
>
> I have mapped my subnet with alias_address
> I have mapped 4 private ip address with 4 public ip address
>
> Everything is working fine (web, email, ftp, etc..) for outgoing and
> incoming connexion for anyone on my network.
>
> With this configuration, 5 person at a time (on my network) could dial to
> the same VPN server.
> 4 with different IP and the one with the alias_address. I supposed that
> only one person at a time can use the alias_address with the IPSec VPN (I
> think, tell me if I'm wrong)
[snip]
Nope, that's right. You can have only one machine behind natd(8) using
ESP at a time (you could actually have one AH and one ESP at the same
time, but since NAT breaks AH, what's the point?). The reason within
natd(8) is that accept for a few protocols (TCP, UDP, ICMP, etc.), all
that it enters into its translation table is,
IPproto: IPsrc_addr-IPdst_addr -> IPalias_addr-IPdst_addr
The obvious problem is that you can only have one mapping like
this. If you had more than one, when you receive a packet of IPproto
from IPdst_addr, to which internal machine do you send it?
Now, that's why natd(8) has problems. Why not add a feature to natd(8)
to get around it? Because there is no way to get around the
problem. ESP packets have this nice SPI field that one could
potentially use to map the traffic between multiple machines behind
NAT to a single VPN end point on the other side, but there is no
practical way for the NAT box to learn the SPI of incoming packets.
--
Crist J. Clark | cjclark@alum.mit.edu
| cjclark@jhu.edu
http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/ | cjc@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031113211620.GB25920>