IPfilter
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: NAT and age

To: Christian Karpp <xn@heidelbg.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: NAT and age
From: Darren Reed <darrenr@reed.wattle.id.au>
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 23:12:37 +1100
Cc: ipfilter@coombs.anu.edu.au
Delivered-to: sp-com-lists@consult.net
Delivered-to: ipfilter-list@securepoint.com
In-reply-to: <458CDE79.3090700@heidelbg.ibm.com>
References: <458BD3E1.7070601@heidelbg.ibm.com> <458BE04B.8010004@reed.wattle.id.au> <458BE9EC.1060903@heidelbg.ibm.com> <458C04D5.60905@reed.wattle.id.au> <458CDE79.3090700@heidelbg.ibm.com>
Reply-to: darrenr@reed.wattle.id.au
Sender: owner-ipfilter@coombs.anu.edu.au
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719)
Christian Karpp wrote:
> Darren Reed wrote:
>
> > ahh, try "ipfstat | grep Ticks"...
>
> OK, now I can see that the counter does not increase.
> It's always "IPF Ticks: 0"
>
> However, I don't see the link yet between IPF ticks in ipfilters and
> the age counter in ipnat. Do ipfilters have to run (e.g. with at least
> a "pass all") in order to make ipnat work?

This means that whoever did the port of IPFilter to AIX didn't get the
timeout
function working.  This means that none of the NAT or state table
entries will
ever expire.  At some point it would probably help if someone at IBM could
send me a box to run AIX on if IBM expects me to answer more questions
on IPFilter running there.

Darren


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>