On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Dalziel, Josh wrote:
> That is what I put into my rules file and its still being blocked by the > firewall :(
Please post the output of "shorewall show nat" as a text attachment.
And please don't reply off-list.
Actually, I'd suggest he provide (to the list) a bit more ... also
A. a sample of the log entries he's seeing that indicate the packets are blocked (the log entries do usually have information about what rule is doing the blocking, and but the default table's FORWARD chain, or a chain is hands off to, still needs to ACCEPT the relevant traffic)
B. the ruleset in the default table, not just the nat table (I don't remember the Shorewall command for that, but it is in the SR FAQ).
I few thoughts I had, about possible small errors that the original poster might miss, after seeing the original posting --
1. Is "the" FAQ that he "fallowed ... to a T" the Shorewall FAQ, item 1? If so, what did he learn when he followed steps 1a and 1b as described there?
2. There is no protocol called "UPD" or "upd". There is udp. Since he got it right in the original e-mail only once out of three tries ... might this be a typo in what he actually did (and not just in his e-mail)?
3. Is "192.186.1.3:27015" really where he wants the traffic to go, or is this a typo for "192.168.1.3:27015"? If it is a typo, might it also be wrong in the rule he actually entered?
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials. Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin. Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click ------------------------------------------------------------------------ leaf-user mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user SR FAQ: http://leaf-project.org/pub/doc/docmanager/docid_1891.html
