-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Sep 28, 2005 at 02:35:39PM -0400, James Pifer wrote:
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 11:20 -0700, Kirk Bocek wrote:
James Pifer wrote:
I can't make 10.10.60.3 use 10.10.60.4 as the router.
I might be wrong about needing to use 10.10.60.3 for the return traffic. The DNAT function on 10.10.60.3 won't change the source IP address. As long a 10.10.60.4 has a route to the first network, this should still work.
If I loaded a port forwarding application on 10.10.60.3 and had it forward ports to .4 for port 5900 I would not have this requirement.
Can't iptables to the same thing somehow?
You lost me here. Iptables *is* our 'port forwarding application' on 10.10.60.3. The rule I wrote would accept traffic going to 10.10.60.3:5900 and send it back out to 10.10.60.4:5900.
Okay, doesn't seem to be doing it. I must be doing something wrong. I'll play with it more this evening.
Hummm, it will be really complicated to do this, since you will need 2 terminating rules to be applied. So, you will need to use 2 tables for it.
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -s ! 10.0.0.0/8 --destination-port 5900 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.10.60.4 iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 10.10.60.4 --destination-port 5900 -j MASQUERADE
Of course, you can use -j SNAT --to-source 10.10.60.3 to get the same effect of -j MASQUERADE. I'm just lazy.
Bu port forwarding application, I think he means a SOCKS{4,5} Proxy. Which is NOT a port forward application.
[]s
- -- Rodrigo Barbosa rodrigob@suespammers.org "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)