On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 21:11:08 +1100, Rod.. Whitworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 18:20:10 -0500, brianBOFH wrote: > > >Hi, > > > >I have two 192.168.1.0/24 networks physically separated. I need to > >get connectivity from one to the other and vice versa _without_ > >renumbering hosts. > > > >That being said - I have an openbsd 3.6 machine with one public and > >one private interface on each end. > > > >I know I can setup the tunnel between the two. But because I can't > >bridge and route between the same network, my question is setting up > >NAT between them. Obviously the SRC and DST needs to be rewritten on > >either side which means your typical NAT setup will not work. Can > >this be achieved with pf? If anyone can point me in the right > >direction I would appreciate it. > > > >Cheers, > >Brian > > > > First we need to know that there are no address clashes between members > of each LAN. > Second: Do you expect to be able to connect in any way from LAN1:hostx > to LAN2:hosty ? > Or are you just wanting to do something at the other gateway? > > The question seemed easy (to state) to you but it misses much detail. > If you tell us too much we can filter better than we can construct in > the absence of detail. > > Maybe renumbering one end is actually easier...... > > >From the land "down under": Australia. > Do we look <umop apisdn> from up over? > > Do NOT CC me - I am subscribed to the list. > Replies to the sender address will fail except from the list-server. > > There will definately be overlap between the two. Hence my wanting to nat the entire network going both directions. I need to connect from LAN1:host(1-254) to LAN2:host(1-254) and vice versa.
Ideally I would be able to add a route to a pseudo-net(nat'd openbsd box the gateway of course) on either end. If it's not possible just say so :) Thanks, Brian
