LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Networking
User Name
Password
Linux - Networking This forum is for any issue related to networks or networking.
Routing, network cards, OSI, etc. Anything is fair game.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 03-23-2010, 12:54 PM   #16
briwood
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2007
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 15

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0

Thanks eantoraz,

First I setup my rules again:

Code:
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# iptables -F
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# iptables -F -t nat
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# iptables -X
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp --dport 3306 -j DNAT --to 128.xxx.xxx.xxx:3197
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp -d 128.xxx.xxx.xxx --dport 3197 -j ACCEPT
[root@adm-10-cms ~]#  iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -p tcp -o lo --dport 3306 -j DNAT --to 128.xxx.xxx.xxx:3197
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# 
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING  -j MASQUERADE
Here's tcpdump of a a successfull connection: 'telnet adm-10-cms 3306' initiated from dev-10-cms

Code:
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# tcpdump -i eth0 -p tcp and port 3197 -n -v
tcpdump: listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes
10:27:20.745788 IP (tos 0x10, ttl  63, id 52105, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 60) 169.xxx.xxx.xxx.48658 > 128.xxx.xxx.xxx.embrace-dp-s: S, cksum 0x5f9a (correct), 3997077676:3997077676(0) win 5840 <mss 1460,sackOK,timestamp 1904696101 0,nop,wscale 7>
10:27:20.746836 IP (tos 0x0, ttl  63, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 60) 128.xxx.xxx.xxx.embrace-dp-s > 169.xxx.xxx.xxx.48658: S, cksum 0x3d23 (correct), 4207250702:4207250702(0) ack 3997077677 win 5792 <mss 1380,sackOK,timestamp 2221807272 1904696101,nop,wscale 2>
10:27:20.747693 IP (tos 0x10, ttl  63, id 52106, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 169.xxx.xxx.xxx.48658 > 128.xxx.xxx.xxx.embrace-dp-s: ., cksum 0x8209 (correct), ack 1 win 46 <nop,nop,timestamp 1904696104 2221807272>
10:27:20.748452 IP (tos 0x8, ttl  63, id 64331, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 112) 128.xxx.xxx.xxx.embrace-dp-s > 169.xxx.xxx.xxx.48658: P 1:61(60) ack 1 win 1448 <nop,nop,timestamp 2221807274 1904696104>
10:27:20.748957 IP (tos 0x10, ttl  63, id 52107, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 169.xxx.xxx.xxx.48658 > 128.xxx.xxx.xxx.embrace-dp-s: ., cksum 0x81ca (correct), ack 61 win 46 <nop,nop,timestamp 1904696105 2221807274>
10:27:25.749780 IP (tos 0x8, ttl  63, id 64333, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 128.xxx.xxx.xxx.embrace-dp-s > 169.xxx.xxx.xxx.48658: F, cksum 0x68c6 (correct), 61:61(0) ack 1 win 1448 <nop,nop,timestamp 2221812275 1904696105>
10:27:25.752042 IP (tos 0x10, ttl  63, id 52108, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 169.xxx.xxx.xxx.48658 > 128.xxx.xxx.xxx.embrace-dp-s: F, cksum 0x5ab3 (correct), 1:1(0) ack 62 win 46 <nop,nop,timestamp 1904701109 2221812275>
10:27:25.752594 IP (tos 0x8, ttl  63, id 64335, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 52) 128.xxx.xxx.xxx.embrace-dp-s > 169.xxx.xxx.xxx.48658: ., cksum 0x5536 (correct), ack 2 win 1448 <nop,nop,timestamp 2221812278 1904701109>

8 packets captured
8 packets received by filter
0 packets dropped by kernel
When I try to capture the unsuccessful connection from localhost I don't get any output. I do:

Code:
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# tcpdump -i lo -p tcp and port 3197 -n -v
tcpdump: listening on lo, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes
then:

Code:
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# telnet localhost 3306
Trying 127.0.0.1...
Nothing appears in the tcpdump console, so I ^C and get:

Code:
0 packets captured
0 packets received by filter
0 packets dropped by kernel
Next I try to listen on 3306 on the lo interface, but nothing comes across when I telnet localhost 3306

Code:
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# tcpdump -i lo -p tcp and port 3306 -n -v
tcpdump: listening on lo, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes

0 packets captured
0 packets received by filter
0 packets dropped by kernel
Trying the same thing to 3307 (no service there) I get this tcpdump output:

Code:
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# tcpdump -i lo -p tcp and port 3307 -n -v
tcpdump: listening on lo, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes
10:37:06.874458 IP (tos 0x10, ttl  64, id 10105, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 60) 169.xxx.xxx.xxx.47587 > 127.0.0.1.opsession-prxy: S, cksum 0xd07d (correct), 2294676478:2294676478(0) win 32792 <mss 16396,sackOK,timestamp 2478038151 0,nop,wscale 7>
10:37:06.874670 IP (tos 0x10, ttl  64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) 127.0.0.1.opsession-prxy > 127.0.0.1.47587: R, cksum 0x62f9 (incorrect (-> 0x663a), 0:0(0) ack 2294676479 win 0

2 packets captured
4 packets received by filter
0 packets dropped by kernel
For the last test I remove the -t nat OUTPUT rule and listen on 3306 while attempting the same telnet localhost 3306. This yields expected output.

Code:
[root@adm-10-cms ~]#  iptables -t nat -D OUTPUT -p tcp -o lo --dport 3306 -j DNAT --to 128.xxx.xxx.xxx:3197

[root@adm-10-cms ~]# tcpdump -i lo -p tcp and port 3306 -n -vtcpdump: listening on lo, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 96 bytes
10:50:19.579767 IP (tos 0x10, ttl  64, id 18940, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 60) 169.xxx.xxx.xxx.34570 > 127.0.0.1.mysql: S, cksum 0xf892 (correct), 3120938229:3120938229(0) win 32792 <mss 16396,sackOK,timestamp 2478830857 0,nop,wscale 7>
10:50:19.580301 IP (tos 0x10, ttl  64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto: TCP (6), length: 40) 127.0.0.1.mysql > 127.0.0.1.34570: R, cksum 0xa39c (incorrect (-> 0xa6dd), 0:0(0) ack 3120938230 win 0

2 packets captured
4 packets received by filter
0 packets dropped by kernel

Last edited by briwood; 03-24-2010 at 10:24 AM.
 
Old 03-23-2010, 01:49 PM   #17
eantoranz
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: Costa Rica
Distribution: Kubuntu, Debian, Knoppix
Posts: 2,092
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 90
With the rules you set in place, do the tcpdump on -i lo and try the telnet localhost 3306 and tell us what comes out.
 
Old 03-23-2010, 01:52 PM   #18
eantoranz
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: Costa Rica
Distribution: Kubuntu, Debian, Knoppix
Posts: 2,092
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 90
And is the counter of the -t nat OUTPUT rule you set increasing when you do the telnet?
 
Old 03-23-2010, 02:04 PM   #19
eantoranz
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: Costa Rica
Distribution: Kubuntu, Debian, Knoppix
Posts: 2,092
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 90
Oh, I saw you tried the tcpdump listening on -i lo so skip that test for now. Tell me about the counter, because that traffic must be going somewhere, right?
 
Old 03-23-2010, 02:29 PM   #20
eantoranz
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: Costa Rica
Distribution: Kubuntu, Debian, Knoppix
Posts: 2,092
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 90
I would think that the problem here is that there's code on the network stack doing checkups after OUTPUT that when looking at the packet (source address: 127.0.0.1, dest addres: something not in loopback) drops it for not being "consistent".... perhaps someone knows about this? And perhaps could sysconf be used to disable such checkup?
 
Old 03-23-2010, 03:10 PM   #21
briwood
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2007
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 15

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by eantoranz View Post
With the rules you set in place, do the tcpdump on -i lo and try the telnet localhost 3306 and tell us what comes out.
When I do

Code:
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# tcpdump -i lo -v
and then 'telnet localhost 3306' in a different console on the same server nothing is captured.

The counter is incrementing. I see:

Code:
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# iptables -L -nvx -t nat
...snip...
Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 108 packets, 7372 bytes)
    pkts      bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination         
       6      360 DNAT       tcp  --  *      lo      0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0           tcp dpt:3306 to:128.XXX.XXX.XXX:3197 
...snip...
I do another telnet localhost and then I see it's at 8:

Code:
Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 108 packets, 7372 bytes)
    pkts      bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               destination         
       8      480 DNAT       tcp  --  *      lo      0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0           tcp dpt:3306 to:128.XXX.XXX.XXX:3197
I really appreciate all your help thus far!

Last edited by briwood; 03-24-2010 at 10:26 AM.
 
Old 03-23-2010, 03:16 PM   #22
briwood
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2007
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 15

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by eantoranz View Post
I would think that the problem here is that there's code on the network stack doing checkups after OUTPUT that when looking at the packet (source address: 127.0.0.1, dest addres: something not in loopback) drops it for not being "consistent".... perhaps someone knows about this? And perhaps could sysconf be used to disable such checkup?
What do you think of my theory here:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...21#post3909121

Since this is a locally-generated packet it is never going to hit this rule

Code:
iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp -d 128.xxx.xxx.xxx --dport 3197 -j ACCEPT
which does the actual forwarding. I *think* that this rule:

Code:
iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -p tcp -o lo --dport 3306 -j DNAT --to 128.xxx.xxx.xxx:3197
only rewrites the destination of the packet. We need the forward rule above to actually send the packet on...

Last edited by briwood; 03-24-2010 at 10:26 AM.
 
Old 03-23-2010, 05:22 PM   #23
eantoranz
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: Costa Rica
Distribution: Kubuntu, Debian, Knoppix
Posts: 2,092
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 90
Well, FORWARD is not touched by packets that are going out from OUTPUT so don't worry cause it doesn't affect you.

I think it's because of the source address inconsistency, I think. Check out this article I just found (a little dated, by the way):

http://lists.netfilter.org/pipermail...er/040104.html

So, how about other tricks? Why do you need locally generated connections on local port 3306 to get connected to a remote host in the first place? In case it's a _must_, wouldn't a SSH tunnel (or a simpler approach) work for you?

In case you want to try the ssh runnel trick, remove the OUTPUT rule doing the DNAT to remote:3197 and run this command on that same host:

ssh -nNT -L 3306:remote-server:3197 user@localhost

After the connection is established (you will know because after a few seconds the command won't return), try telnet localhost 3306

Maybe there are simpler approaches but _at least_ I bet that one will work.
 
Old 03-23-2010, 05:30 PM   #24
eantoranz
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: Costa Rica
Distribution: Kubuntu, Debian, Knoppix
Posts: 2,092
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 90
It _has_ to be the IP address inconsistency.

With all your rules in place, try to do a telnet to your local IP address on the intranet (instead of localhost). That way, it did work with your DNAT trick.
 
Old 03-23-2010, 05:31 PM   #25
eantoranz
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: Costa Rica
Distribution: Kubuntu, Debian, Knoppix
Posts: 2,092
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 90
At least, it did work for me.
 
Old 03-23-2010, 07:44 PM   #26
briwood
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2007
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 15

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by eantoranz View Post
wouldn't a SSH tunnel (or a simpler approach) work for you?
Thought of that. The remote mysql server doesn't allow ssh and I don't have control over that server.

Quote:
(or a simpler approach)
Is there a non ssh option for setting up a simple tunnel to 3197 on the remote server?

Will try telnet to ipaddr tomorrow and report back. If that works, I may look into snat.

Thanks.;
 
Old 03-24-2010, 09:13 AM   #27
eantoranz
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: Costa Rica
Distribution: Kubuntu, Debian, Knoppix
Posts: 2,092
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 90
The ssh tunnel as I told you to use it yesterday requires no ssh on the mysql server but on the host you are working instead (the one where you want local connections to port 3306 to be sent to a remote server port 3197).
 
Old 03-24-2010, 10:20 AM   #28
briwood
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2007
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 15

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Thanks again for all the help!

You are right. Telnetting to anything other than localhost works:

Code:
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# telnet 169.xxx.xxx.xxx 3306
Trying 169.xxx.xxx.xxx...
Connected to adm-10-cms.example.com (169.xxx.xxx.xxx).
Escape character is '^]'.
8
5.0.67-log��Mw.}OP%e,�!QDAYz{|{v^R`^]
telnet> quit
Connection closed.
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# telnet adm-10-cms 3306
Trying 169.xxx.xxx.xxx...
Connected to adm-10-cms.example.com (169.xxx.xxx.xxx).
Escape character is '^]'.
8
5.0.67-log��q%])SE@R,�![SnO!Sbo+%s:Connection closed by foreign host.
[root@adm-10-cms ~]# telnet localhost 3306
Trying 127.0.0.1...
(hangs...^C)
So if you snatted the localhost packets correctly, this could probably be made to work from localhost via the loopback interface.

Thanks for enlightening me on the ssh tunnel. I assumed that you needed sshd running on the target server. Since you don't I'm pursuing this option since it is way simpler. Always good to know more about iptables though!
 
Old 02-16-2016, 09:35 PM   #29
fredericgermain
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Dec 2015
Posts: 2

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I think your problem is really solved here (I mean, solved the iptables way) :

http://unix.stackexchange.com/questi...s-to-127-0-0-1

you need to activate local routing on your outbound interface. if eth0 :

sysctl -w net.ipv4.conf.eth0.route_localnet=1

it seems to be like security feature

hope it helps some people coming to this question !
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
redirect output to remote server via ssh packets Programming 4 05-19-2009 08:30 PM
How to mount remote server locally to a machine? ammar Linux - Networking 1 08-18-2006 01:02 AM
iptables:redirect ports except for packets destined for fierwall(upto 256 ip) itself mmshekiba Linux - Security 1 02-02-2006 12:08 PM
logging to a remote syslog server is dropping packets draeician73 Linux - Security 1 10-20-2004 06:19 PM
iptables- not passing packets to server jbrandis Linux - Security 4 12-09-2001 04:44 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Networking

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:00 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration