View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
adelante Tux's lil' helper
![Tux's lil' helper Tux's lil' helper](/images/ranks/rank_rect_1.gif)
![](images/avatars/923206952443957173bd8f.gif)
Joined: 19 Apr 2003 Posts: 133 Location: South Africa - Johannesburg
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 5:28 am Post subject: Routing Problem |
|
|
Hi, I seem to have a bit of a routing problem.
I have a server on my LAN, and an internet server, and there is a VPN setup between them.
LAN VPN IP = 192.168.1.223
LAN Server IP = 192.168.30.223
INTERNET VPN IP = 192.168.1.1
INTERNET Server IP = 209.xxx.xxx.xxx
Now I have setup iptables on the LAN server to POSTROUTE all 192.168.30.223:80 requests to 192.168.1.1:80 (ie: pushing all lan port 80 requests over the VPN to the Internet server)
My Problem is the routing of traffic back from the internet server over the vpn to the lan server.
To my knowledge, what is happening at the moment, is a request is coming to 192.168.30.223:80 and being forwarded to 192.168.1.1:80 correctly, but then 192.168.1.1 doesnt know what to do with the traffic, so it's passing it to it's default gateway, which is an internet router, and that doesnt know wtf to do with it either. (correct me if i am wrong)
How do I tell the Internet server that any traffic coming from the LAN server over the vpn, it must route back the same way it came? |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/gentoo/images/spacer.gif) |
bigfunkymo Apprentice
![Apprentice Apprentice](/images/ranks/rank_rect_2.gif)
![](images/avatars/368859194429737890a944.jpg)
Joined: 23 Jan 2004 Posts: 237
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
what is the output of _________________ [No package... Grabbing a set.] |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/gentoo/images/spacer.gif) |
adelante Tux's lil' helper
![Tux's lil' helper Tux's lil' helper](/images/ranks/rank_rect_1.gif)
![](images/avatars/923206952443957173bd8f.gif)
Joined: 19 Apr 2003 Posts: 133 Location: South Africa - Johannesburg
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Code: |
Athena ~ # route -n
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
192.168.1.223 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0
209.212.xxx.xxx 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.240 U 0 0 0 eth0
209.212.xxx.xxx 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.240 U 0 0 0 eth0
127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
0.0.0.0 209.212.xxx.xxx 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
Athena ~ #
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/gentoo/images/spacer.gif) |
adelante Tux's lil' helper
![Tux's lil' helper Tux's lil' helper](/images/ranks/rank_rect_1.gif)
![](images/avatars/923206952443957173bd8f.gif)
Joined: 19 Apr 2003 Posts: 133 Location: South Africa - Johannesburg
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
WOOHOO I GOT IT WORKING!!!
Code: |
route add -net 192.168.1.1 netmask 255.255.255.255 gw 192.168.1.223
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/gentoo/images/spacer.gif) |
bigfunkymo Apprentice
![Apprentice Apprentice](/images/ranks/rank_rect_2.gif)
![](images/avatars/368859194429737890a944.jpg)
Joined: 23 Jan 2004 Posts: 237
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I assume that is from the "internet server"?
I don't really have a complete picture of what your configuration is, but I'm getting the vibe that you have something like this:
Code: |
A Router X B
---------------- ----------------- -------------
| | ------ | | | |
| 192.168.30.223 |--LAN--|Switch|--| 192.168.30.1(?) | | |
| 192.168.1.223 |==VPN==| |==| (Not on VPN) |====VPN=====| 192.168.1.1 |
| | ------ | | | |
---------------- | | <internet IF> |--internet--| 209.x.x.x |
| | | | |
| ----------------- -------------
-----------------------------
<The rest of 192.168.30.0/24>
|
Also, you didn't mention which VPN you were using.
If your setup is like how I described, then why not just put the VPN endpoint on Router X and just route traffic rather than trying to NAT, like you're doing now? Alternatively, you could make Box A into a router, but then you would have to add static routes to every host on 192.168.30.0/24--but if the already default router was the VPN endpoint, then there are no static routes necessary. All you have to do is add the route back to 192.168.30.0/24 via 192.168.1.223 from Box B and regular IP routing will handle it, no NAT required. _________________ [No package... Grabbing a set.] |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/gentoo/images/spacer.gif) |
adelante Tux's lil' helper
![Tux's lil' helper Tux's lil' helper](/images/ranks/rank_rect_1.gif)
![](images/avatars/923206952443957173bd8f.gif)
Joined: 19 Apr 2003 Posts: 133 Location: South Africa - Johannesburg
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well this is my actually problem...
We might be moving all our internet servers from 1 hosting provider to another, now I need to come up with a way to have minimal downtime.
Now currently I have a Firewall server, which has like 10 internet ip's bound to it on eth0. eth1 has 192.168.0.1 and the rest of the servers are on the 192.168.0.0/24 network. Then I just NAT ip:port to the internal servers from the firewall.
So what I was thinking of doing while dns changes and stuff, was to move all our servers to a new location, and setup vpn's from the firewall to the servers at the new location, then instead of doing the natting to the internal 192.168.0.0/24 i could push it through the vpn connections.
Unless you have a better idea on how to make a migration from one provider to another? I wish I could keep the same IP addresses, but obviously that isnt an option... |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/gentoo/images/spacer.gif) |
bigfunkymo Apprentice
![Apprentice Apprentice](/images/ranks/rank_rect_2.gif)
![](images/avatars/368859194429737890a944.jpg)
Joined: 23 Jan 2004 Posts: 237
|
Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
for that situation, your idea doesn't seem so bad. I've never had to do such a migration myself, though. _________________ [No package... Grabbing a set.] |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/gentoo/images/spacer.gif) |
almackska Tux's lil' helper
![Tux's lil' helper Tux's lil' helper](/images/ranks/rank_rect_1.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/Austin_Powers/Austin_Powers_-_Austin.gif)
Joined: 16 Sep 2005 Posts: 112
|
Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2005 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think i might have the same problem. this is my output when i " route -n "
Code: | Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 wlan0
127.0.0.0 127.0.0.1 255.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 lo
0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 wlan0 |
Is this enough info? |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/gentoo/images/spacer.gif) |
evilben Tux's lil' helper
![Tux's lil' helper Tux's lil' helper](/images/ranks/rank_rect_1.gif)
![](images/avatars/195748123241a63ce83de5e.jpg)
Joined: 14 Jun 2004 Posts: 128 Location: GA, USA
|
Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
almackska, I can't tell what your issue is from just the table.
But adelante, I am having the exact problem that you had--packets come in from the vpn and then my machine doesn't know what to do with them--but you're solution didn't work for me. This is the routing table for the machine I need to access from afar:
Code: |
tux incoming # route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
172.16.1.20 172.16.1.1 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 tun0
172.16.1.1 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 tun0
192.168.2.0 172.16.1.1 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 tun0
192.168.0.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
10.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
loopback * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
default 10.59.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1
|
The top line is equivalent to the one you added, I think. 172.16.1.1 and 172.16.1.20 are the ends of my vpn, with 20 being the machine that is running the service. 192.168.2.* is the lan ip behind the machine with a static ip, and 192.168.0.* is the lan here.
I don't understand why your solution would work anyway--could you explain please (that is, if it didn't "just work"!)? |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/gentoo/images/spacer.gif) |
|