On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Adam Thompson athom...@c3a.ca wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:bill.marque...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 8:30 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] 1:1 multi-homed NAT broken?
This sounds like
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] 1:1 multi-homed NAT broken?
This sounds like a missing reply-to, but I'm not entirely sure why.
The inbound SMTP rule should be overriding the routing and sending the
traffic out the right path. Take a look at /tmp/rules.debug and see if the
inbound SMTP rule has
-8291
-Original Message-
From: Chris Buechler [mailto:cbuech...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 12:10 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] 1:1 multi-homed NAT broken?
[...]
Yeah WAN rules in 1.2.x don't have reply-to. They do in 2.0.
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Adam Thompson athom...@c3a.ca wrote:
So... does that mean I can't accomplish this with 1.2.x at all?
You can change filter.inc to add reply-to to WAN rules.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:bill.marque...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 8:30 PM
To: support@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense Support] 1:1 multi-homed NAT broken?
This sounds like a missing reply-to, but I'm not entirely sure why.
The inbound SMTP
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 3:17 PM, Adam Thompson athom...@c3a.ca wrote:
My problem: reply packets to inbound NAT’d connection are being sent back
out the wrong interface, and being rejected as bogons by the next-hop
router.
The setup…
OPT1(OPT1) - vlan0 -
My problem: reply packets to inbound NAT’d connection are being sent back out
the wrong interface, and being rejected as bogons by the next-hop router.
The setup…
OPT1(OPT1) - vlan0 - 192.139.69.168 (/28)
WAN - vlan1 - 67.226.137.177
