two tinc hosts behind same NAT

[Eric Feliksik]

Hi Steffen,

I'm using version 1.0.23, as I need a proven solution (stable) for these
purposes.
I did not know the LocalDiscovery option, thanks! It will not always work
(sometimes there's multiple NAT with docker), but I can worry about that
later.

Cheers!
Eric


On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Steffen Vogel <post at steffenvogel.de> wrote:

> Hi Eric,
>
> Which version are you using? I have similar issues with the newest
> 1.1pre10.
>
> Did you check out the ‚LocalDiscovery‘ option?
> For 1.1, you also can get more information about the actual connection
> mode by using the ‚info [node]‘ command.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Steffen
>
> > Am 05.12.2014 um 12:26 schrieb Eric Feliksik <feliksik at gmail.com>:
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I have 3 nodes: A, B and C. C has external IP and A and B are behind NAT.
> >
> > It turns out A and B route their traffic via the C, which they ConnectTo
> with; this instead of getting connection details from one another and
> contacting eachother directly (mesh style). The reason is, as I conclude
> from tincd debug output, is that they see the peer as having a minimum MTU
> of 0. I suspect this is because both nodes happen to be behind the same NAT
> and thus have the same public IP, in this particular case.
> >
> > If I place the nodes in different NATed enviroments (different public
> IP's) it does work.
> >
> > Can this be fixed in a way such that nodes A and B do directly
> communicate?
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Eric
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > tinc mailing list
> > tinc at tinc-vpn.org
> > http://www.tinc-vpn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinc
>
> _______________________________________________
> tinc mailing list
> tinc at tinc-vpn.org
> http://www.tinc-vpn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.tinc-vpn.org/pipermail/tinc/attachments/20141205/404c0143/attachment.html>