On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 10:57:16 +0200 Ermal Luçi <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Milan Obuch <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 09:49:57 +0200 > > Ian FREISLICH <[email protected]> wrote: [ snip ] > > > How is your NAT rule defined? I had a closer look at the way I > > > did it: > > > > > > nat on vlan46 from 10.8.0.0/15 to !<on-our-net> -> xx.xx.xx.xx/24 > > > round-robin sticky-address > > > > > > I think you may be missing the "round-robin" that spreads the > > > mapping over your pool. The manual says that when more than 1 > > > address is specified, round-robin is the only pool type allowed, > > > it does not say that when more than 1 address is specified this > > > is the default pool option. > > > > > > > Thanks for hint, however, this is not the case I think. My > > definition is > > > > nat on $if_ext from <net_int> to any -> $pool_ext round-robin > > sticky-address > > > > where <net_int> contains contains some /24 segments from 10.0.0.0/8 > > range and one /24 and one /15 segment from 172.16.0.0/12 range, > > $pool_ext is one /23 public segment. > > > > > You can check your state table to see if it is indeed round-robin. > > > > > > #pfctl -s sta |grep " (" > > > ... > > > all tcp a.b.c.d:53802 (10.0.0.220:42808) -> 41.246.55.66:24 > > > ESTABLISHED:ESTABLISHED all tcp a.b.c.e:60794 (10.0.0.38:47825) -> > > > 216.58.223.10:443 ESTABLISHED:FIN_WAIT_2 > > > > > > If all your addresses "a.b.c.X" are the same, it's not round-robin > > > and that's your problem. > > > > > > > Well, this is something I do not fully understand. If my pool were > > a.b.c.0/24, then what you wrote could not be any other way - I think > > this is not what you meant. Or did you think there will be only one > > IP used? That's definitelly not the case, I see many IPs from my /23 > > segment here. > > > > One strange thing occured, however - it looks like if one IP from > > this /23 range gets used, trouble occurs. I do pfctl -k and pfctl -K > > for this address and all is well again. As long as this one IP is > > not used, everything works. When it gets used again, voila, trouble > > again. > > > > > Can you check if you are reaching the limits on source entries > set limit src-nodes 2000 > > sets the maximum number of entries in the memory pool used > for tracking source IP addresses (generated by the sticky-address and > src.track options) to 2000. > Well, I think it is big enough - pfctl -s memory: states hard limit 500000 src-nodes hard limit 100000 frags hard limit 50000 tables hard limit 5000 table-entries hard limit 500000 Excerpt from pfctl -vs info: Source Tracking Table current entries 418 searches 1435901 36.2/s inserts 4577 0.1/s removals 4159 0.1/s My gut feeling is there is just much more space than necessary, but this should not hurt, I think. Thanks, Milan _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-pf To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
