Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
(ASCEND) NAT
Has anyone else had difficulty with the NAT implementation in the P75 or P85
when using an (ISP assigned) IP address which has one of the octets less than
100? For example, if you were given an address of 210.34.171.51 from an ISP,
and you tried to FTP from some sites, the FTP would fail?
The problem seems to be created by the Pipeline issuing PORT commands with
leading zeros for the address parameters, e.g. 210,034,171,051. Some
implementations of the ftp daemon (wrongly) allow those leading zeros to trigger
the octal conversion so the IP address comes out wrong (in the example,
210.28.171.41 would be the result).
[What follows is mostly ranting on my part. Feel free to ignore this part, but
I would hope that someday this problem could get fixed.]
I think the problem has been around for a while since the documentation
mentions that address on the local network should have each octet > 100 (and I
REALLY appreciated having to renumber my local lan) and documentation usually
takes a while to produce. Since this IP address is not within my control (the
ISP assigned it to me) I can't very well just choose a more suitable address.
While I agree that decimal values can have leading zeros, and the RFC is clear
that the values of PORT are decimal, that doesn't help when the ftp daemon or
remote OS or whatever decides to ignore that. Does the Pipeline *have* to send
those leading zeros?
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
Follow-Ups: