[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lwip-users] routing over PPP using lwip
|
From: |
Sylvain Rochet |
|
Subject: |
Re: [lwip-users] routing over PPP using lwip |
|
Date: |
Mon, 18 Jan 2016 14:13:01 +0100 |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
Hi Ajay,
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 05:19:11PM +0530, address@hidden wrote:
> >
> > What you are looking for is a NAT[1] implementation, not basic IP
> > routing[2], lwIP does not provide NAT at all. There used to be a
> > basic NAT feature merged in, but it was removed because the one who
> > proposed the patch wasn't allowed to do so.
> >
> > NAT, other than basic NAT support, is a huge task. Especially for
> > tricky protocols (FTP, SIP/RTP, …) which require well designed
> > helpers. I'm not sure it qualify as being added in a lightweight
> > stack.
> >
> > Sylvain
> >
> > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_address_translation
> > [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packet_forwarding
>
> I am probably misunderstood IP_FORWARD switch of LwIP. Sorry for being
> silly now, May I ask in what scenario IP_FORWARD is used?
Anyone needing a small IP router, e.g. between two Ethernet networks.
NAT is much much more than just IP routing.
> Also I just did a quick search on LwIP + NAT, and I found this
> discussion: http://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?7506
> Looks like someone was working on it but why NAT is not added to LwIP?
Copyright issue, as explained in the discussion you are referencing.
> Is it something not allowed to be done?
It is allowed, and if you do it with approval from your company to
distribute the code, it will be very welcomed ;-)
> I am confused as I see file attached to the posts are also missing.
Yep, removed due to copyright infringement.
Sylvain
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature