Skip to content

Conversation

@erikselin
Copy link
Contributor

It might come as a surprise but some cross-region connections between AWS us-east-1 and AWS us-west-2 are currently routing through more than 42 hops. I might be wrong but if we can set the IP4 TTL to any non-default number 63 might be a better choice to get us close to the Linux default of 64?

@brianmay
Copy link
Member

I actually hate this hack, and have considered removing it, but not quite game enough...

Thanks for the patch.

@brianmay brianmay merged commit f353701 into sshuttle:master Jul 17, 2020
@erikselin
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks a lot, @brianmay 👍

skuhl added a commit to skuhl/sshuttle that referenced this pull request Jul 12, 2021
Previously, it was possible to run sshuttle locally without using ssh
and connecting to a remote server. In this configuration, traffic was
redirected to the sshuttle server running on the localhost. However,
the firewall needed to distinguish between traffic leaving the
sshuttle server and traffic that originated from the machine that
still needed to be routed through the sshuttle server. The TTL of the
packets leaving the sshuttle server were manipulated to indicate to
the firewall what should happen. The TTL was adjusted for all packets
leaving the sshuttle server (even if it wasn't necessary because the
server and client were running on different machines).

Changing the TTL caused trouble and some machines, and
the --ttl option was added as a workaround to change how the TTL was
set for traffic leaving sshuttle. All of this added complexity to the
code for a feature (running the server on localhost) that is likely
only used for testing and rarely used by others.

This commit updates the associated documentation, but doesn't fully
fix the ipfw method since I am unable to test that.

This change will also make sshuttle fail to work if -r is used to
specify a localhost. Pull request sshuttle#610 partially addresses that issue.

For example, see: sshuttle#240, sshuttle#490, sshuttle#660, sshuttle#606.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants