• Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
Netgate Discussion Forum
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login

NAT specific port to different virtual IP not working?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved NAT
3 Posts 2 Posters 2.1k Views
Loading More Posts
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • C
    cburns
    last edited by Apr 20, 2011, 12:16 PM Apr 20, 2011, 8:31 AM

    im trying to do outbund nat from my internal smtp gateway to using its own virtual wan ip (carp)
    The problem is that the later rule for general outbound nat for the serverlan takes precedence…

    $ pfctl -s nat
    nat-anchor "natearly/" all
    nat-anchor "natrules/
    " all
    nat on em4 inet from 10.0.3.92 to any port = smtp -> x.x.152.181 port 25   <--- Not working, it turns into x.x.152.185 when it talks port 25 to the internet
    nat on em4 inet from 10.0.242.0/24 to any -> x.x.152.181 static-port
    nat on em4 inet from 10.0.2.0/23 to any -> x.x.152.185 port 1024:65535  <--- this one seems to take precedence?
    nat on em4 inet from 10.0.0.0/24 to any -> x.x.152.179 port 1024:65535

    Is the order wrong? I thought that it was based on a first match basis?
    Any insights to this is appreciated :)

    Im running 2.0rc1 build april 18

    Cheers

    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
    • J
      jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
      last edited by Apr 21, 2011, 6:12 PM

      Look at Diagnostics > States the next time you try a connection, and post what the state for the connection in question looks like.

      It is first-match-wins, but something may not be matching that rule.

      Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

      Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

      Do not Chat/PM for help!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • C
        cburns
        last edited by Apr 22, 2011, 7:12 PM

        Thanks for the tip. Seemed to be something with the inbound NAT rule that messed it up… Had source port range defined and for some reason that messed up the outbound NAT
        Anywho problem solved now, thanks :)

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        3 out of 3
        • First post
          3/3
          Last post
        Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.
          This community forum collects and processes your personal information.
          consent.not_received