Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 29 Jun 2015 12:42:22 +0200
From:      Ian FREISLICH <ian.freislich@capeaugusta.com>
To:        Milan Obuch <freebsd-pf@dino.sk>
Cc:        Daniel Hartmeier <daniel@benzedrine.ch>, freebsd-pf@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Large scale NAT with PF - some weird problem
Message-ID:  <E1Z9WW6-000PzF-PO@clue.co.za>
In-Reply-To: <20150629114506.1cfd6f1b@zeta.dino.sk>
References:  <20150629114506.1cfd6f1b@zeta.dino.sk> <14e119e8fa8.2755.abfb21602af57f30a7457738c46ad3ae@capeaugusta.com> <E1Z6dHz-0000uu-D8@clue.co.za> <E1Z6eVg-0000yz-Ar@clue.co.za> <20150621195753.7b162633@zeta.dino.sk> <E1Z7Ixx-0006K1-5p@clue.co.za> <E1Z7K1Y-0006Ph-ON@clue.co.za> <20150623112331.668395d1@zeta.dino.sk> <20150628100609.635544e0@zeta.dino.sk> <20150629082654.GA22693@insomnia.benzedrine.ch> <20150629105201.7ee24e38@zeta.dino.sk> <20150629092932.GC22693@insomnia.benzedrine.ch>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Milan Obuch wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2015 11:29:32 +0200
> Daniel Hartmeier <daniel@benzedrine.ch> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 10:52:01AM +0200, Milan Obuch wrote:
> > 
> > > Does this answerred your question fully or something more would be
> > > usefull?
> > 
> > How are you doing ARP?
> >
> > You're not assigning every address on x.y.26.0/23 as an alias, are
> > you?
> > 
> > So who answers ARP requests of the upstream router?
> 
> There is no ARP on routed address block.
> 
> In cisco speak, there is just
> 
> ip route x.y.24.0 255.255.252.0 x.y.3.19
> 
> statement and that's it. Nothing more. Whole address range from
> x.y.24.0 to x.y.27.254 is routed here as it should be. For something
> like this ARP would be really evil solution.

That's OK, as long as the NAT network is routed to your PF box it
will work.

The situation you mentioned in a previous message where you see
lots and lots of NAT states for a single public IP address is what
I suspected was happening.  When you require more NAT states per
IP than ephemeral ports you will run into issues because you will
run out of NAT space.

If the round-robin works with a smaller pool, then I suspect Glebius
will be interested.

Ian

-- 
Ian Freislich



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E1Z9WW6-000PzF-PO>