NAT trouble

[Björn Lindström]

Bill Moran <wmoran at potentialtech.com> writes:

>> (Where tun0 is the interface of my ADSL connection.)
>
> Is tun0 the real interface?

No, the actual card is rl0:

rl0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
        inet6 fe80::2e0:4cff:feb0:5d5b%rl0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 
        ether 00:e0:4c:b0:5d:5b
        media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX <full-duplex>)
        status: active
ppp0: flags=8010<POINTOPOINT,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
tun0: flags=8051<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1492
        inet 81.228.156.82 --> 81.228.156.1 netmask 0xffffffff 
        Opened by PID 53

Is it the actual NIC that should be put in $nat_interface?

> What happens if you start it manually?  Are there any entries in
> /var/log/messages to tell you why it didn't start automatically?
> Looking at the output at system startup, there should be some
> indication of why natd didn't start.

Nope. There's nothing helpful there that I can see. Only this seems
related:

Jul 18 17:13:36 calliope /kernel: IP packet filtering initialized, \
  divert enabled, rule-based forwarding enabled, default to deny, \
  logging limited to 10 packets/entry by default

...and that seems right.

> Are you saying that your internal machines _can_ get to the net when
> you delete that rule?  If so, then you don't need nat, and you need to
> reconsider your configuration.

I need NAT, because I need machines inside the LAN to serve certain
ports. (15000, as you can see from the line from natd.conf.)