On 2007/06/04 19:37, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > Finally, this rule can't be practically replaced with a set of "nat" > and "rdr" rules since this would require 65535 "rdr" rules, one for > each existing port number.
this part isn't correct; if unspecified, the port number defaults to staying the same; binat is just the same as nat+rdr. N.B. (especially if you use ftp-proxy) that binat takes priority over nat/rdr.
