/* HINT: Search archives @ http://www.indyramp.com/masq/ before posting!
/* ALSO: Don't quote this header. It makes you look lame :-) */
I have read and searched for information on this topic, but it
seems to be relatively rare: Why re-masqing a de-masqed packet
is not in the recent linux kernels.
I have a website that is on a machine being portforwarded to
and it works great for the internet at large. ( www.mysite.url )
however, the other computers get nothing when the use that
url. (they can get to the website from its lan address, but not
the gateway's)
I know that Michael Best has a patch out, and has had it out for
quite along time now. However- it has not made it into the
recent kernels ( e.j. redhat's 2.2.16 release ). What could
the reason for that be? Apathy? Everyone use the patch? Maybe
it opens some sort of security breech? There must be some
substantitive reason/explanation. I am loath to compile a kernel
on my gateway, for it is such a feeble old machine. Why isnt
this VERY desireable trait lacking in my favorite OS, whereas
certain other NAT tcp/ip stacks certainly do remasqing?
If there was any discussion/explanation/FAQ entry that covered
that, i seem to have missed it.
_______________________________________________
Masq maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Admin requests can be handled at http://www.indyramp.com/masq-list/ --
THIS INCLUDES UNSUBSCRIBING!
or email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PLEASE read the HOWTO and search the archives before posting.
You can start your search at http://www.indyramp.com/masq/
Please keep general linux/unix/pc/internet questions off the list.
