Why does my NAT setup only work properly from time to time?












2















Homework assignment...



There are 3 computers in a local network: 192.168.0.185 (the 'client'), 192.168.0.129 (the 'gateway') and 192.168.0.81 (the 'server'). The 'server' is running a HTTP server, so typing 192.168.0.81 in a browser's address bar from any of the other two computers displays a webpage.



The assignment is to set up NAT in the so-called 'gateway' in such a way that typing its IP address (192.168.0.129) in the 'client's browser will display the webpage served by the 'server'. This is my solution attempt:



echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward

iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.129 --dport 80 -j DNAT --to 192.168.0.81:80
iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129:80


This (I hoped) would make the 'gateway' redirect requests made to it to the 'server' (DNAT) while substituting source address of the request to its own so that the 'server' will correctly send the response through the 'gateway' and not straightly to the 'client' (SNAT).



I typed the 'gateway's IP in the 'client's browser's address bar. Hooray! I saw the webpage! I thought I was done!



Except I wasn't. I then reloaded the page on the 'client'. And I got timeout error. I reloaded the page once again. Timeout again. I waited a teeny tiny bit and reloaded once again. This page the webpage was served correctly. So I reloaded for the final time and... timeout.



This confuses me. It seems that once a page is served things stop working for a while. Why is that happening? Where is my mistake?



I should note that typing the 'server's address in the 'client's browser (as opposed to typing the 'gateway's address) does not cause such problems.










share|improve this question

























  • could be a problem with the web server

    – jsotola
    4 hours ago











  • @jsotola I don't think so; please see the edited question.

    – gaazkam
    4 hours ago











  • @jsotola Because the assignment says I have to configure the 'gateway' in such a way to make this possible.

    – gaazkam
    4 hours ago











  • The way to debug this is to use tcpdump or wireshark on all network interfaces that may be interesting, and look at which packets go where, and what is happening to them. (1) If all 3 computers are connected to a single switch, watch out for ICMP REDIRECT messages which will take the gateway out of the loop. (2) You don't have to use both SNAT and DNAT; the connection tracker will take care of SNAT.

    – dirkt
    55 mins ago











  • @dirkt Wrt SNAT: I was trying to remove this and things stopped working completely. I think the server was trying to send its responses omitting the 'gateway' then.

    – gaazkam
    21 mins ago
















2















Homework assignment...



There are 3 computers in a local network: 192.168.0.185 (the 'client'), 192.168.0.129 (the 'gateway') and 192.168.0.81 (the 'server'). The 'server' is running a HTTP server, so typing 192.168.0.81 in a browser's address bar from any of the other two computers displays a webpage.



The assignment is to set up NAT in the so-called 'gateway' in such a way that typing its IP address (192.168.0.129) in the 'client's browser will display the webpage served by the 'server'. This is my solution attempt:



echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward

iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.129 --dport 80 -j DNAT --to 192.168.0.81:80
iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129:80


This (I hoped) would make the 'gateway' redirect requests made to it to the 'server' (DNAT) while substituting source address of the request to its own so that the 'server' will correctly send the response through the 'gateway' and not straightly to the 'client' (SNAT).



I typed the 'gateway's IP in the 'client's browser's address bar. Hooray! I saw the webpage! I thought I was done!



Except I wasn't. I then reloaded the page on the 'client'. And I got timeout error. I reloaded the page once again. Timeout again. I waited a teeny tiny bit and reloaded once again. This page the webpage was served correctly. So I reloaded for the final time and... timeout.



This confuses me. It seems that once a page is served things stop working for a while. Why is that happening? Where is my mistake?



I should note that typing the 'server's address in the 'client's browser (as opposed to typing the 'gateway's address) does not cause such problems.










share|improve this question

























  • could be a problem with the web server

    – jsotola
    4 hours ago











  • @jsotola I don't think so; please see the edited question.

    – gaazkam
    4 hours ago











  • @jsotola Because the assignment says I have to configure the 'gateway' in such a way to make this possible.

    – gaazkam
    4 hours ago











  • The way to debug this is to use tcpdump or wireshark on all network interfaces that may be interesting, and look at which packets go where, and what is happening to them. (1) If all 3 computers are connected to a single switch, watch out for ICMP REDIRECT messages which will take the gateway out of the loop. (2) You don't have to use both SNAT and DNAT; the connection tracker will take care of SNAT.

    – dirkt
    55 mins ago











  • @dirkt Wrt SNAT: I was trying to remove this and things stopped working completely. I think the server was trying to send its responses omitting the 'gateway' then.

    – gaazkam
    21 mins ago














2












2








2


0






Homework assignment...



There are 3 computers in a local network: 192.168.0.185 (the 'client'), 192.168.0.129 (the 'gateway') and 192.168.0.81 (the 'server'). The 'server' is running a HTTP server, so typing 192.168.0.81 in a browser's address bar from any of the other two computers displays a webpage.



The assignment is to set up NAT in the so-called 'gateway' in such a way that typing its IP address (192.168.0.129) in the 'client's browser will display the webpage served by the 'server'. This is my solution attempt:



echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward

iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.129 --dport 80 -j DNAT --to 192.168.0.81:80
iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129:80


This (I hoped) would make the 'gateway' redirect requests made to it to the 'server' (DNAT) while substituting source address of the request to its own so that the 'server' will correctly send the response through the 'gateway' and not straightly to the 'client' (SNAT).



I typed the 'gateway's IP in the 'client's browser's address bar. Hooray! I saw the webpage! I thought I was done!



Except I wasn't. I then reloaded the page on the 'client'. And I got timeout error. I reloaded the page once again. Timeout again. I waited a teeny tiny bit and reloaded once again. This page the webpage was served correctly. So I reloaded for the final time and... timeout.



This confuses me. It seems that once a page is served things stop working for a while. Why is that happening? Where is my mistake?



I should note that typing the 'server's address in the 'client's browser (as opposed to typing the 'gateway's address) does not cause such problems.










share|improve this question
















Homework assignment...



There are 3 computers in a local network: 192.168.0.185 (the 'client'), 192.168.0.129 (the 'gateway') and 192.168.0.81 (the 'server'). The 'server' is running a HTTP server, so typing 192.168.0.81 in a browser's address bar from any of the other two computers displays a webpage.



The assignment is to set up NAT in the so-called 'gateway' in such a way that typing its IP address (192.168.0.129) in the 'client's browser will display the webpage served by the 'server'. This is my solution attempt:



echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward

iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.129 --dport 80 -j DNAT --to 192.168.0.81:80
iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129:80


This (I hoped) would make the 'gateway' redirect requests made to it to the 'server' (DNAT) while substituting source address of the request to its own so that the 'server' will correctly send the response through the 'gateway' and not straightly to the 'client' (SNAT).



I typed the 'gateway's IP in the 'client's browser's address bar. Hooray! I saw the webpage! I thought I was done!



Except I wasn't. I then reloaded the page on the 'client'. And I got timeout error. I reloaded the page once again. Timeout again. I waited a teeny tiny bit and reloaded once again. This page the webpage was served correctly. So I reloaded for the final time and... timeout.



This confuses me. It seems that once a page is served things stop working for a while. Why is that happening? Where is my mistake?



I should note that typing the 'server's address in the 'client's browser (as opposed to typing the 'gateway's address) does not cause such problems.







networking iptables nat






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 4 hours ago







gaazkam

















asked 4 hours ago









gaazkamgaazkam

3631514




3631514













  • could be a problem with the web server

    – jsotola
    4 hours ago











  • @jsotola I don't think so; please see the edited question.

    – gaazkam
    4 hours ago











  • @jsotola Because the assignment says I have to configure the 'gateway' in such a way to make this possible.

    – gaazkam
    4 hours ago











  • The way to debug this is to use tcpdump or wireshark on all network interfaces that may be interesting, and look at which packets go where, and what is happening to them. (1) If all 3 computers are connected to a single switch, watch out for ICMP REDIRECT messages which will take the gateway out of the loop. (2) You don't have to use both SNAT and DNAT; the connection tracker will take care of SNAT.

    – dirkt
    55 mins ago











  • @dirkt Wrt SNAT: I was trying to remove this and things stopped working completely. I think the server was trying to send its responses omitting the 'gateway' then.

    – gaazkam
    21 mins ago



















  • could be a problem with the web server

    – jsotola
    4 hours ago











  • @jsotola I don't think so; please see the edited question.

    – gaazkam
    4 hours ago











  • @jsotola Because the assignment says I have to configure the 'gateway' in such a way to make this possible.

    – gaazkam
    4 hours ago











  • The way to debug this is to use tcpdump or wireshark on all network interfaces that may be interesting, and look at which packets go where, and what is happening to them. (1) If all 3 computers are connected to a single switch, watch out for ICMP REDIRECT messages which will take the gateway out of the loop. (2) You don't have to use both SNAT and DNAT; the connection tracker will take care of SNAT.

    – dirkt
    55 mins ago











  • @dirkt Wrt SNAT: I was trying to remove this and things stopped working completely. I think the server was trying to send its responses omitting the 'gateway' then.

    – gaazkam
    21 mins ago

















could be a problem with the web server

– jsotola
4 hours ago





could be a problem with the web server

– jsotola
4 hours ago













@jsotola I don't think so; please see the edited question.

– gaazkam
4 hours ago





@jsotola I don't think so; please see the edited question.

– gaazkam
4 hours ago













@jsotola Because the assignment says I have to configure the 'gateway' in such a way to make this possible.

– gaazkam
4 hours ago





@jsotola Because the assignment says I have to configure the 'gateway' in such a way to make this possible.

– gaazkam
4 hours ago













The way to debug this is to use tcpdump or wireshark on all network interfaces that may be interesting, and look at which packets go where, and what is happening to them. (1) If all 3 computers are connected to a single switch, watch out for ICMP REDIRECT messages which will take the gateway out of the loop. (2) You don't have to use both SNAT and DNAT; the connection tracker will take care of SNAT.

– dirkt
55 mins ago





The way to debug this is to use tcpdump or wireshark on all network interfaces that may be interesting, and look at which packets go where, and what is happening to them. (1) If all 3 computers are connected to a single switch, watch out for ICMP REDIRECT messages which will take the gateway out of the loop. (2) You don't have to use both SNAT and DNAT; the connection tracker will take care of SNAT.

– dirkt
55 mins ago













@dirkt Wrt SNAT: I was trying to remove this and things stopped working completely. I think the server was trying to send its responses omitting the 'gateway' then.

– gaazkam
21 mins ago





@dirkt Wrt SNAT: I was trying to remove this and things stopped working completely. I think the server was trying to send its responses omitting the 'gateway' then.

– gaazkam
21 mins ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















0














I have a PC with Debian, serving as router and may share some experience with you.



Routing



If you are intentionally using host as a router, dont ever do



echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward



Instead do either:




  • sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_forward=1


  • nano /etc/sysctl.conf:


    • and edit net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1




Forwarding



Oh I've just noticed that you can offer following stuff all almost without magic. That's just the production answer - its up to you now to dig inside configurations (google shorewall sources - then you will know how iptables parsers/generators work)



Next I can advise some webmin web interface to play with it - you access 192.168.0.81:10000 Now you have no reason to learn command line - all iptables stuff is now done through web interface! ;) Also read its shell scripts and know now, how production things are working!



Logging



webmin did all stuff, but if you are on debian and want a console log - just type apt install iftop (google iftop sources, read, educate)





Feel free to like and accept this post, if you found my time and this info useful!






share|improve this answer










New contributor




xakepp35 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





















  • Why should I never do echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward?

    – gaazkam
    2 hours ago











  • @gaazkam because it has a standart way of defining default-behaviour of defining that at a boot time, having that setting ready "on" and not waiting your custom script or shell to interacting, to run specific router-init stuff at system init!!! Read the answer, stop inventing things alredy invented at century ago))

    – xakepp35
    2 hours ago













  • I'm sorry but I don't think I'm allowed to use tools like Shorewall or Webmin, just vanilla iptables I'm afraid ;/ Also - Im terribly sorry, but I feel reading source code of these tools is... kind of overkillish if my goal is just to set up NAT for a single time

    – gaazkam
    2 hours ago











  • those are mutually exclusive things. If you want to learn topic - you have to look at "what to be done as per today" - what binaries and utilities are availble - that's at least. Good if you could examinate their source code, surface level at least

    – xakepp35
    2 hours ago













  • If you dont want to learn topic - pay a bribe to an educator and never appear here anymore)))

    – xakepp35
    2 hours ago



















0














I think I got it finally. The culprit was this line:



iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129:80


Things started working when I changed it to this:



iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129


Not sure why but I have a vague idea that NAT uses ports to identify connections. So specifying only one port was leading into conflicts when there was more than 1 request.






share|improve this answer























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "106"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f494721%2fwhy-does-my-nat-setup-only-work-properly-from-time-to-time%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    0














    I have a PC with Debian, serving as router and may share some experience with you.



    Routing



    If you are intentionally using host as a router, dont ever do



    echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward



    Instead do either:




    • sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_forward=1


    • nano /etc/sysctl.conf:


      • and edit net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1




    Forwarding



    Oh I've just noticed that you can offer following stuff all almost without magic. That's just the production answer - its up to you now to dig inside configurations (google shorewall sources - then you will know how iptables parsers/generators work)



    Next I can advise some webmin web interface to play with it - you access 192.168.0.81:10000 Now you have no reason to learn command line - all iptables stuff is now done through web interface! ;) Also read its shell scripts and know now, how production things are working!



    Logging



    webmin did all stuff, but if you are on debian and want a console log - just type apt install iftop (google iftop sources, read, educate)





    Feel free to like and accept this post, if you found my time and this info useful!






    share|improve this answer










    New contributor




    xakepp35 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





















    • Why should I never do echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward?

      – gaazkam
      2 hours ago











    • @gaazkam because it has a standart way of defining default-behaviour of defining that at a boot time, having that setting ready "on" and not waiting your custom script or shell to interacting, to run specific router-init stuff at system init!!! Read the answer, stop inventing things alredy invented at century ago))

      – xakepp35
      2 hours ago













    • I'm sorry but I don't think I'm allowed to use tools like Shorewall or Webmin, just vanilla iptables I'm afraid ;/ Also - Im terribly sorry, but I feel reading source code of these tools is... kind of overkillish if my goal is just to set up NAT for a single time

      – gaazkam
      2 hours ago











    • those are mutually exclusive things. If you want to learn topic - you have to look at "what to be done as per today" - what binaries and utilities are availble - that's at least. Good if you could examinate their source code, surface level at least

      – xakepp35
      2 hours ago













    • If you dont want to learn topic - pay a bribe to an educator and never appear here anymore)))

      – xakepp35
      2 hours ago
















    0














    I have a PC with Debian, serving as router and may share some experience with you.



    Routing



    If you are intentionally using host as a router, dont ever do



    echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward



    Instead do either:




    • sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_forward=1


    • nano /etc/sysctl.conf:


      • and edit net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1




    Forwarding



    Oh I've just noticed that you can offer following stuff all almost without magic. That's just the production answer - its up to you now to dig inside configurations (google shorewall sources - then you will know how iptables parsers/generators work)



    Next I can advise some webmin web interface to play with it - you access 192.168.0.81:10000 Now you have no reason to learn command line - all iptables stuff is now done through web interface! ;) Also read its shell scripts and know now, how production things are working!



    Logging



    webmin did all stuff, but if you are on debian and want a console log - just type apt install iftop (google iftop sources, read, educate)





    Feel free to like and accept this post, if you found my time and this info useful!






    share|improve this answer










    New contributor




    xakepp35 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





















    • Why should I never do echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward?

      – gaazkam
      2 hours ago











    • @gaazkam because it has a standart way of defining default-behaviour of defining that at a boot time, having that setting ready "on" and not waiting your custom script or shell to interacting, to run specific router-init stuff at system init!!! Read the answer, stop inventing things alredy invented at century ago))

      – xakepp35
      2 hours ago













    • I'm sorry but I don't think I'm allowed to use tools like Shorewall or Webmin, just vanilla iptables I'm afraid ;/ Also - Im terribly sorry, but I feel reading source code of these tools is... kind of overkillish if my goal is just to set up NAT for a single time

      – gaazkam
      2 hours ago











    • those are mutually exclusive things. If you want to learn topic - you have to look at "what to be done as per today" - what binaries and utilities are availble - that's at least. Good if you could examinate their source code, surface level at least

      – xakepp35
      2 hours ago













    • If you dont want to learn topic - pay a bribe to an educator and never appear here anymore)))

      – xakepp35
      2 hours ago














    0












    0








    0







    I have a PC with Debian, serving as router and may share some experience with you.



    Routing



    If you are intentionally using host as a router, dont ever do



    echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward



    Instead do either:




    • sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_forward=1


    • nano /etc/sysctl.conf:


      • and edit net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1




    Forwarding



    Oh I've just noticed that you can offer following stuff all almost without magic. That's just the production answer - its up to you now to dig inside configurations (google shorewall sources - then you will know how iptables parsers/generators work)



    Next I can advise some webmin web interface to play with it - you access 192.168.0.81:10000 Now you have no reason to learn command line - all iptables stuff is now done through web interface! ;) Also read its shell scripts and know now, how production things are working!



    Logging



    webmin did all stuff, but if you are on debian and want a console log - just type apt install iftop (google iftop sources, read, educate)





    Feel free to like and accept this post, if you found my time and this info useful!






    share|improve this answer










    New contributor




    xakepp35 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.










    I have a PC with Debian, serving as router and may share some experience with you.



    Routing



    If you are intentionally using host as a router, dont ever do



    echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward



    Instead do either:




    • sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_forward=1


    • nano /etc/sysctl.conf:


      • and edit net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1




    Forwarding



    Oh I've just noticed that you can offer following stuff all almost without magic. That's just the production answer - its up to you now to dig inside configurations (google shorewall sources - then you will know how iptables parsers/generators work)



    Next I can advise some webmin web interface to play with it - you access 192.168.0.81:10000 Now you have no reason to learn command line - all iptables stuff is now done through web interface! ;) Also read its shell scripts and know now, how production things are working!



    Logging



    webmin did all stuff, but if you are on debian and want a console log - just type apt install iftop (google iftop sources, read, educate)





    Feel free to like and accept this post, if you found my time and this info useful!







    share|improve this answer










    New contributor




    xakepp35 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.









    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 2 hours ago





















    New contributor




    xakepp35 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.









    answered 2 hours ago









    xakepp35xakepp35

    1084




    1084




    New contributor




    xakepp35 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





    New contributor





    xakepp35 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    xakepp35 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.













    • Why should I never do echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward?

      – gaazkam
      2 hours ago











    • @gaazkam because it has a standart way of defining default-behaviour of defining that at a boot time, having that setting ready "on" and not waiting your custom script or shell to interacting, to run specific router-init stuff at system init!!! Read the answer, stop inventing things alredy invented at century ago))

      – xakepp35
      2 hours ago













    • I'm sorry but I don't think I'm allowed to use tools like Shorewall or Webmin, just vanilla iptables I'm afraid ;/ Also - Im terribly sorry, but I feel reading source code of these tools is... kind of overkillish if my goal is just to set up NAT for a single time

      – gaazkam
      2 hours ago











    • those are mutually exclusive things. If you want to learn topic - you have to look at "what to be done as per today" - what binaries and utilities are availble - that's at least. Good if you could examinate their source code, surface level at least

      – xakepp35
      2 hours ago













    • If you dont want to learn topic - pay a bribe to an educator and never appear here anymore)))

      – xakepp35
      2 hours ago



















    • Why should I never do echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward?

      – gaazkam
      2 hours ago











    • @gaazkam because it has a standart way of defining default-behaviour of defining that at a boot time, having that setting ready "on" and not waiting your custom script or shell to interacting, to run specific router-init stuff at system init!!! Read the answer, stop inventing things alredy invented at century ago))

      – xakepp35
      2 hours ago













    • I'm sorry but I don't think I'm allowed to use tools like Shorewall or Webmin, just vanilla iptables I'm afraid ;/ Also - Im terribly sorry, but I feel reading source code of these tools is... kind of overkillish if my goal is just to set up NAT for a single time

      – gaazkam
      2 hours ago











    • those are mutually exclusive things. If you want to learn topic - you have to look at "what to be done as per today" - what binaries and utilities are availble - that's at least. Good if you could examinate their source code, surface level at least

      – xakepp35
      2 hours ago













    • If you dont want to learn topic - pay a bribe to an educator and never appear here anymore)))

      – xakepp35
      2 hours ago

















    Why should I never do echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward?

    – gaazkam
    2 hours ago





    Why should I never do echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward?

    – gaazkam
    2 hours ago













    @gaazkam because it has a standart way of defining default-behaviour of defining that at a boot time, having that setting ready "on" and not waiting your custom script or shell to interacting, to run specific router-init stuff at system init!!! Read the answer, stop inventing things alredy invented at century ago))

    – xakepp35
    2 hours ago







    @gaazkam because it has a standart way of defining default-behaviour of defining that at a boot time, having that setting ready "on" and not waiting your custom script or shell to interacting, to run specific router-init stuff at system init!!! Read the answer, stop inventing things alredy invented at century ago))

    – xakepp35
    2 hours ago















    I'm sorry but I don't think I'm allowed to use tools like Shorewall or Webmin, just vanilla iptables I'm afraid ;/ Also - Im terribly sorry, but I feel reading source code of these tools is... kind of overkillish if my goal is just to set up NAT for a single time

    – gaazkam
    2 hours ago





    I'm sorry but I don't think I'm allowed to use tools like Shorewall or Webmin, just vanilla iptables I'm afraid ;/ Also - Im terribly sorry, but I feel reading source code of these tools is... kind of overkillish if my goal is just to set up NAT for a single time

    – gaazkam
    2 hours ago













    those are mutually exclusive things. If you want to learn topic - you have to look at "what to be done as per today" - what binaries and utilities are availble - that's at least. Good if you could examinate their source code, surface level at least

    – xakepp35
    2 hours ago







    those are mutually exclusive things. If you want to learn topic - you have to look at "what to be done as per today" - what binaries and utilities are availble - that's at least. Good if you could examinate their source code, surface level at least

    – xakepp35
    2 hours ago















    If you dont want to learn topic - pay a bribe to an educator and never appear here anymore)))

    – xakepp35
    2 hours ago





    If you dont want to learn topic - pay a bribe to an educator and never appear here anymore)))

    – xakepp35
    2 hours ago













    0














    I think I got it finally. The culprit was this line:



    iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129:80


    Things started working when I changed it to this:



    iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129


    Not sure why but I have a vague idea that NAT uses ports to identify connections. So specifying only one port was leading into conflicts when there was more than 1 request.






    share|improve this answer




























      0














      I think I got it finally. The culprit was this line:



      iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129:80


      Things started working when I changed it to this:



      iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129


      Not sure why but I have a vague idea that NAT uses ports to identify connections. So specifying only one port was leading into conflicts when there was more than 1 request.






      share|improve this answer


























        0












        0








        0







        I think I got it finally. The culprit was this line:



        iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129:80


        Things started working when I changed it to this:



        iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129


        Not sure why but I have a vague idea that NAT uses ports to identify connections. So specifying only one port was leading into conflicts when there was more than 1 request.






        share|improve this answer













        I think I got it finally. The culprit was this line:



        iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129:80


        Things started working when I changed it to this:



        iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 192.168.0.81 --dport 80 -j SNAT --to 192.168.0.129


        Not sure why but I have a vague idea that NAT uses ports to identify connections. So specifying only one port was leading into conflicts when there was more than 1 request.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 17 mins ago









        gaazkamgaazkam

        3631514




        3631514






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f494721%2fwhy-does-my-nat-setup-only-work-properly-from-time-to-time%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Loup dans la culture

            How to solve the problem of ntp “Unable to contact time server” from KDE?

            Connection limited (no internet access)