[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  Chris Buechler <cbuechler at gmail dot com>
 Cc:  m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] Server NAT does not work?
 Date:  Wed, 13 Apr 2005 17:05:13 -0400
On 4/13/05, Roman Kuznetsov <rk at systola dot de> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Claude Morin [mailto:klodefactor at gmail dot com]
> > Sent: Dienstag, 12. April 2005 19:28
> > To: Roman Kuznetsov
> > Cc: Chris Buechler; m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
> > Subject: Re: [m0n0wall] Server NAT does not work?
> >
> > This proxy ARP question has arisen a few times recently. For
> > the interest of list members who may not understand proxy ARP
> > fully, here's an explanation:
> > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk648/tk361/technologies_tech_
> > note09186a0080094adb.shtml
> >
> This is exactly why I said it is illogical.
> I know what Proxy ARP is and even in this cisco document it says (my accents):
> "Proxy ARP is the technique in which one host, usually a router, answers ARP
> requests intended for *another* machine. By "faking" its identity, the router
> accepts responsibility for *routing* packets to the "real" destination."
> This is what got me confused: one usually uses Proxy ARP to proxy requests to
> another machine, not the same machine. A common practice for having multiply
> addresses on the same interface is by means of aliasing, nor by proxying.
> Otherwise this can be very confusing, since means of the task resolution seems
> to have different application.

It's not going to the same machine though, the IP in question is being
assigned to entries that are NAT'ed to hosts behind m0n0wall.  It is
indeed going to another machine.