[Chilli] kmod-coova

[Oguzhan Kayhan]

It might create a great improvement in performance for sure,
But what about the users that doesnt us NAT in their network.
For ex, with me, i got no NAT  all my users gets real ip.
So does it work with me too?

On Wednesday 07 April 2010 08:10:50 am David Bird wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Been working on a concept for a kernel module for CoovaChilli. With the
> subversion code, configure with "--with-nfcoova" to have the module
> built. With the support built in, and the xt_coova module loaded, the
> idea is that authenticated traffic goes straight through the kernel and
> unauthorized traffic still goes through chilli user-space - enforcing
> captive portal and doing the walled garden, etc. xt_coova (which borrows
> from the 'recent' module) does a simple allow/drop decision based on
> authentication status. Some specific configurations are needed for this
> to work.
> 
> The iptables rules might look like this:
> 
> iptables -I FORWARD -o eth0 --src 10.0.0.0/8 \
>   -m coova --name chilli -j ACCEPT
> iptables -I FORWARD -i eth0 --dst 10.0.0.0/8 \
>   -m coova --name chilli --dest -j ACCEPT
> 
> iptables -I FORWARD --src 11.0.0.0/8 -j ACCEPT
> iptables -I FORWARD --dst 11.0.0.0/8 -j ACCEPT
> 
> (where the assumption is that the default FORWARD rule is to DENY). The
> idea is that traffic to/from eth0 (WAN) from source 10.0.0.0/8 (the
> chilli DHCP IP space) is either allowed or dropped by the xt_coova
> module based on authentication status. The 11.0.0.0/8 network, in this
> example, is the network chilli has configured for it's uamlisten.
> 
> I should mention that when using the kernel module, I have it setup such
> that the dhcpif (eth1) is actually configured with IP address 10.1.0.1
> and the same IP is configured in chilli as the 'dhcplisten' (note that
> typically chilli doesn't want the dhcpif interface configured with an
> IP). Chilli is then also configured with 'uamlisten' of 11.0.0.1 and
> this is the IP address that gets assigned to tun0 (so note that
> dhcplisten and uamlisten are different!). The high level concept is that
> subscribers get a 10.1.0.0/24 IP address which is routed (when
> authenticated) through the kernel. Chilli still monitors all traffic on
> the dhcpif and when users are not authorized yet (i.e. their 10.1.0.0/24
> address is not being forwarded), then chilli does the routing (after
> doing a NAT translation from 10.1.0.0/24 to 11.1.0.0/24).
> 
> Thus, chilli basically is only routing unauthorized traffic while
> authorized traffic goes straight through the kernel. With some testing
> on open-mesh routers, we have seen this can drastically increase
> throughput for authenticated users.
> 
> With the iptables rules above, here is an example chilli.conf that I
> have been using:
> 
> cat<<EOF>/tmp/chilli.conf
> net 10.1.0.0/16
> dynip 10.1.0.0/24
> statip 10.1.1.0/24
> 
> uamlisten 11.1.0.1
> dhcplisten 10.1.0.1
> dhcpstart 10
> uamaliasname chilli
> ipup=
> ipdown=
> 
> radiusserver1 localhost
> radiussecret testing123
> dhcpif eth0
> dns1 192.168.1.1
> uamdomain coova.org
> uamserver http://portal/hotspot
> uamsecret uamsecret
> cmdsock /var/run/chilli.sock
> kname chilli
> EOF
> 
> Give it a try if interested in testing!
> 
> David
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Chilli mailing list
> Chilli at coova.org
> http://lists.coova.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chilli
>