Re: I never thought of this scenario

Liste des GroupesRevenir à col misc 
Sujet : Re: I never thought of this scenario
De : gtaylor (at) *nospam* tnetconsulting.net (Grant Taylor)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.misc
Date : 23. Apr 2024, 00:00:05
Autres entêtes
Organisation : TNet Consulting
Message-ID : <v06q5l$fni$1@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 4/22/24 05:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Routing itself *is* network address translation.
Nope.

The router removes the current next hop address and replaces it with a new one, and it reduces the TTL field.
Nope.
Run a sniffer on your Internet traffic and you will see that traffic is being sent to the destination IP address of the remote server, not your local router.
In the spirit of the benefit of doubt / nomenclature type problem, I believe that you may be conflating what happens with MAC addresses and what happens with IP addresses on Ethernet (or probably any 802 network).
Routing between Ethernet networks wholesale replaces the source and destination MAC address of the Ethernet frame.  But without NAT, the source and destination IP address do not change.

All NAT does is replace the *source* destination/port as well, and store the originating port/ip address ready for return packets.
Source NAT replaces the source IP and possibly, but no guarantee, the source port.
Destination NAT replaces the destination IP and possibly, but no guarantee, the destination port.
Most, but not all, SOHO routers do source NAT to replace the private unrouted LAN IP with the public Internet IP of the SOHO router.  But that is a very special configuration.
All the routers at the ISP, the core of the Internet, and the server's hosting provider don't modify either the source nor destination IP address.

Where that happens in time  is purely implementation dependent. It might even happen simultaneously with a multicore CPU
There is a logical sequence of events.  You have to choose where the IP packet is going to go before you can do anything else to it as that decision may influence what is done to it.

As an engineer all  that a router does is modify some or all of the information in a packet header, look up where the next hop is in its routing tables, and receive dynamic updates to those routing tables where appropriate. And forward the *modified* packet to the next hop.
The IP packet isn't modified save for a TTL decremnt
The outgoing Ethernet frame is brand new and using different information than the incoming Ethernet frame.
--
Grant. . . .

Date Sujet#  Auteur
7 Apr 24 * I never thought of this scenario159The Natural Philosopher
7 Apr 24 +- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Andy Burns
7 Apr 24 +* Re: I never thought of this scenario156The Natural Philosopher
8 Apr 24 i+* Re: I never thought of this scenario154Lawrence D'Oliveiro
8 Apr 24 ii+* Re: I never thought of this scenario77Grant Taylor
8 Apr 24 iii`* Re: I never thought of this scenario76Lawrence D'Oliveiro
8 Apr 24 iii `* Re: I never thought of this scenario75Grant Taylor
8 Apr 24 iii  `* Re: I never thought of this scenario74Lawrence D'Oliveiro
8 Apr 24 iii   `* Re: I never thought of this scenario73Grant Taylor
8 Apr 24 iii    `* Re: I never thought of this scenario72Lawrence D'Oliveiro
9 Apr 24 iii     `* Re: I never thought of this scenario71Grant Taylor
9 Apr 24 iii      `* Re: I never thought of this scenario70Lawrence D'Oliveiro
9 Apr 24 iii       +- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Marc Haber
9 Apr 24 iii       `* Re: I never thought of this scenario68Grant Taylor
9 Apr 24 iii        +* Re: I never thought of this scenario66Lawrence D'Oliveiro
9 Apr 24 iii        i+* Re: I never thought of this scenario3Marc Haber
10 Apr 24 iii        ii+- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Grant Taylor
10 Apr 24 iii        ii`- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
10 Apr 24 iii        i`* Re: I never thought of this scenario62Grant Taylor
10 Apr 24 iii        i `* Re: I never thought of this scenario61Lawrence D'Oliveiro
10 Apr 24 iii        i  +* Re: I never thought of this scenario56Tauno Voipio
10 Apr 24 iii        i  i+- Re: I never thought of this scenario1D
13 Apr 24 iii        i  i`* Re: I never thought of this scenario54Lawrence D'Oliveiro
13 Apr 24 iii        i  i `* Re: I never thought of this scenario53Grant Taylor
13 Apr 24 iii        i  i  `* Re: I never thought of this scenario52Lawrence D'Oliveiro
13 Apr 24 iii        i  i   +* Re: I never thought of this scenario45Grant Taylor
15 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i`* Re: I never thought of this scenario44Lawrence D'Oliveiro
15 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i `* Re: I never thought of this scenario43Grant Taylor
19 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i  `* Re: I never thought of this scenario42Lawrence D'Oliveiro
19 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i   `* Re: I never thought of this scenario41Marc Haber
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i    `* Re: I never thought of this scenario40Lawrence D'Oliveiro
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     +* Re: I never thought of this scenario33Rich
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i`* Re: I never thought of this scenario32Richard Kettlewell
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i +* Re: I never thought of this scenario4Marc Haber
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i i`* Re: I never thought of this scenario3The Natural Philosopher
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i i `* Re: I never thought of this scenario2Marco Moock
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i i  `- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Grant Taylor
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i `* Re: I never thought of this scenario27Rich
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i  `* Re: I never thought of this scenario26Marco Moock
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i   `* Re: I never thought of this scenario25Rich
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    +* Re: I never thought of this scenario21Rich
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i`* Re: I never thought of this scenario20Grant Taylor
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i +* Re: I never thought of this scenario11Rich
21 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i`* Re: I never thought of this scenario10The Natural Philosopher
21 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i +* Re: I never thought of this scenario5Grant Taylor
22 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i i`* Re: I never thought of this scenario4The Natural Philosopher
22 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i i +- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Marc Haber
23 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i i `* Re: I never thought of this scenario2Grant Taylor
23 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i i  `- Re: I never thought of this scenario1The Natural Philosopher
22 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i `* Re: I never thought of this scenario4Marc Haber
22 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i  +- Re: I never thought of this scenario1The Natural Philosopher
22 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i  `* Re: DHCP argument ....2Jim Jackson
23 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i   `- Re: DHCP argument ....1D
21 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i +* Re: I never thought of this scenario7The Natural Philosopher
21 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i+- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Grant Taylor
23 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i`* Re: I never thought of this scenario5Lawrence D'Oliveiro
23 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i `* Re: I never thought of this scenario4Marc Haber
24 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i  +- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Rich
26 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i  `* Re: I never thought of this scenario2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
26 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i i   `- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Marc Haber
23 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    i `- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i    `* Re: I never thought of this scenario3Grant Taylor
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i     `* Re: I never thought of this scenario2Marco Moock
21 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     i      `- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Grant Taylor
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i     `* Re: I never thought of this scenario6Marc Haber
23 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i      `* Re: I never thought of this scenario5Lawrence D'Oliveiro
23 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i       `* Re: I never thought of this scenario4Marc Haber
26 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i        `* Re: I never thought of this scenario3Lawrence D'Oliveiro
26 Apr 24 iii        i  i   i         `* Re: I never thought of this scenario2Richard Kettlewell
8 May 24 iii        i  i   i          `- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
13 Apr 24 iii        i  i   `* Re: I never thought of this scenario6Marc Haber
15 Apr 24 iii        i  i    `* Re: I never thought of this scenario5Lawrence D'Oliveiro
15 Apr 24 iii        i  i     `* Re: I never thought of this scenario4Rich
15 Apr 24 iii        i  i      +- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Grant Taylor
17 Apr 24 iii        i  i      `* Re: I never thought of this scenario2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
20 Apr 24 iii        i  i       `- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Marco Moock
10 Apr 24 iii        i  +- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Marc Haber
10 Apr 24 iii        i  `* Re: I never thought of this scenario3Grant Taylor
11 Apr 24 iii        i   +- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Marc Haber
13 Apr 24 iii        i   `- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
9 Apr 24 iii        `- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Marc Haber
8 Apr 24 ii+* Re: I never thought of this scenario63The Natural Philosopher
8 Apr 24 iii`* Re: I never thought of this scenario62The Natural Philosopher
9 Apr 24 iii +* Re: I never thought of this scenario4Grant Taylor
9 Apr 24 iii i`* Re: I never thought of this scenario3Carlos E.R.
9 Apr 24 iii i `* Re: I never thought of this scenario2The Natural Philosopher
13 Apr 24 iii i  `- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
9 Apr 24 iii `* Re: I never thought of this scenario57Lawrence D'Oliveiro
9 Apr 24 iii  +* Re: I never thought of this scenario2Grant Taylor
13 Apr 24 iii  i`- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
9 Apr 24 iii  `* Re: I never thought of this scenario54The Natural Philosopher
13 Apr 24 iii   `* Re: I never thought of this scenario53Lawrence D'Oliveiro
13 Apr 24 iii    +* Re: I never thought of this scenario46Grant Taylor
15 Apr 24 iii    i`* Re: I never thought of this scenario45Lawrence D'Oliveiro
15 Apr 24 iii    i +* Re: I never thought of this scenario40Grant Taylor
19 Apr 24 iii    i i`* Re: I never thought of this scenario39Lawrence D'Oliveiro
19 Apr 24 iii    i i +* Re: I never thought of this scenario15Marc Haber
19 Apr 24 iii    i i i+* Re: I never thought of this scenario2Grant Taylor
19 Apr 24 iii    i i ii`- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Rich
20 Apr 24 iii    i i i`* Re: I never thought of this scenario12Lawrence D'Oliveiro
20 Apr 24 iii    i i i +* Re: I never thought of this scenario7Rich
20 Apr 24 iii    i i i `* Re: I never thought of this scenario4Marc Haber
19 Apr 24 iii    i i `* Re: I never thought of this scenario23The Natural Philosopher
15 Apr 24 iii    i `* Re: I never thought of this scenario4Marc Haber
13 Apr 24 iii    `* Re: I never thought of this scenario6The Natural Philosopher
8 Apr 24 ii+* Re: I never thought of this scenario3Carlos E.R.
8 Apr 24 ii`* Re: I never thought of this scenario10Andy Burns
8 Apr 24 i`- Re: I never thought of this scenario1The Natural Philosopher
7 Apr 24 `- Re: I never thought of this scenario1Marco Moock

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal