Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #174633
| From | Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.user |
| Subject | Re: iptables question |
| Date | 2016-11-13 11:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sD0mB-7qR-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <sCNSp-7BL-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <sCP7P-8pY-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <sCZqx-6Me-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <sCZTz-7fH-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Le 13/11/2016 à 11:09, Joe a écrit : > Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> wrote: > >> Le 12/11/2016 à 23:32, Joe a écrit : >>> >>> The SNAT should not be an issue, it can handle all protocols >>> transparently >> >> No it cannot. NAT is not possible with some IP protocols. Plain IPSec >> (without NAT-T encapsulation) is the first one that comes in mind. > > I used to have a fair bit to do with PPTP through three or four NATs, PPTP rather falls into the "complex protocols" described below. >> Also many complex protocols such as FTP or SIP (nothing exotic here) >> require special support and this is not transparent as it requires >> messing with the payload, not only with the packet headers. Use of >> encryption with these protocoles may come in the way and defeat NAT >> handling. > > Is ssh really a more difficult protocol to handle than http? No. SSH relies on a single TCP connection, like TCP and other "simple" protocols. I reacted to you writing "NAT can handle *all* protocols *transparently*". > I'm using 'protocol' in > the small-p sense, not referring specifically to Internet Protocols. What is the "small-p sense" ?
Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
iptables question deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-11-12 22:20 +0100
Re: iptables question Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-11-12 23:40 +0100
Re: iptables question deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 01:30 +0100
Re: iptables question Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-13 10:50 +0100
Re: iptables question Michael Milliman <michael.e.milliman@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 12:40 +0100
Re: iptables question deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 16:10 +0100
Re: iptables question Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-13 18:00 +0100
Re: iptables question deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 20:50 +0100
Re: iptables question Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-13 21:20 +0100
Re: iptables question deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 21:50 +0100
Re: iptables question Henning <henning@itcfollmann.com> - 2016-11-13 22:50 +0100
Re: iptables question Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-13 23:30 +0100
Re: iptables question Henning <henning@itcfollmann.com> - 2016-11-14 00:30 +0100
Re: iptables question deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 00:50 +0100
Re: iptables question Henning Follmann <hfollmann@itcfollmann.com> - 2016-11-14 13:10 +0100
Re: iptables question deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 20:20 +0100
Re: iptables question Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-13 23:30 +0100
Re: iptables question deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 01:00 +0100
Re: iptables question Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-14 23:10 +0100
Re: iptables question Igor Cicimov <icicimov@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 03:10 +0100
Re: iptables question deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 08:20 +0100
Re: iptables question deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 09:10 +0100
Re: iptables question Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-13 10:40 +0100
Re: iptables question Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-11-13 11:10 +0100
Re: iptables question Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-13 11:40 +0100
Re: iptables question Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-11-13 13:40 +0100
Re: iptables question Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-13 15:00 +0100
Re: iptables question Igor Cicimov <icicimov@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 03:00 +0100
csiph-web