Ok. I will not go on wit this.
Just one last comment un that "complexity"...
I need to send replies to external originated traffic to the same network interface they came in. And those come via ampr-gw, no matter the setup. So even if I use NAT for outgoing connections, in case of an connection request from the internet which arrives via ampr-gw, I still need to reply to it via ampr-gw.
This can be acomplished by using connection and routing marks or rules. I use the routing mark approach in an router at the moment, but until a few weeks ago, I used policy routing (rules).
And I accomplish to unload the gateway as much as possible, and depend minimal on it. Of course feel free to do it as you wish.
-----Original Message----- From: 44net-bounces+marius=yo2loj.ro@hamradio.ucsd.edu [mailto:44net-bounces+marius=yo2loj.ro@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Cory (NQ1E) Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015 23:58 To: AMPRNet working group Subject: Re: [44net] (no subject)
And for your access from the internet you need a way to get 'from Assigned44LAN to ! 44.0.0.0/8' via the ampr-gw tunnel. One solution would be the one described 2 days earlier, a second custom routing table (for which I use the 'default' table).
Another possibility would be to drop the usage of table 44 and put all routes to table 'main'. Then the rules are not needed for 44/44 traffic. Only the part relating to the reply to incoming non-44 connections via ampr-gw, which need 2 rules to work.
Wait... I thought you were using NAT/PAT/Masquerade for your [Assigned44LAN -> InternetHosts] traffic??? Why would you then talk about sending those packets to ampr-gw? What exactly are you trying to accomplish with all this added complexity?