![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Josan Kadett wrote: > It is definetely impossible to use IPTables to handle packets with incorrect > checksums since NAT would drop the connection right away, otherwise I would > not have been asking this question here.> > -----Original Message-----> From: Aidas Kasparas [mailto:a.kasparas@gmc.lt] > Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 8:54 AM> To: Josan Kadett> Subject: Re: Entirely ignoring TCP and UDP checksum in kernel level > > How about setting up a separate box which would listen on that > 192.168.77.1 address and MASQUERADE connections to your crazy box from > 192.168.1.x address? Maybe then you would no longer need to break things > in kernel? Isn't rp_filter for this? A chunk of my iptables firewall script is: # Force route verification for f in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/*/rp_filter; do echo 1 > $f; done So why don't you try: for f in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/*/rp_filter; do echo "0" > $f; done Kalin. -- || ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ || ( ) http://ThinRope.net/ ( ) || ______________________ || - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 14:05 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||