On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Rainer Sokoll <rainer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 08:34:39PM +0700, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
>
>> I don't quite understand what you're trying to achieve (why are you
>> using NAT over vpn?),
>
> There is no NAT over vpn. Routing looks like:
> If the target is the companies network, route the packets into the
> tunnel, no NAT.
> If the target is the internet, route the packets to the ISP's gateway
> and do NAT.
so eth2 is the interface to your ISP? Have you set up routing correctly?
>> - openvpn works just fine on dom0 or domU. Same setup (choice of
>> tun/tap, bridge setup, etc.) that you'd do on a normal box.
>
> Openvpn is not my problem, it works fine. My problem is that I cannot
> get SNAT working. And I am wondering whether Xen could bo the root of my
> problem.
It shouldn't be. RHEL/Centos5 comes with Xen 3.1+ and libvirt, which
creates virbr0 bridge, which does MASQUARADE for domUs on that bridge.
It works as expected. I haven't tried SNAT on it, but if MASQUARADE
works then SNAT should work as well.
You might want to try changing the NAT conditions from using "-o eth2"
to simply using --source and --destination first, with MASQUARADE for
simplicity and easy-debugging. A colleague had some problems a while
back, turned out he uses the wrong interface for "-o".
--
Fajar
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
Home