Since I can connect to the remote workstations from the VM, the
problem cannot be with their service setup. And since the problem
isn't resolved by using a different VNC viewer from my local
workstation, the problem can't be the VNC client. This just leaves the
ssh tunnel - specifically the po
remote workstations from the VM, the problem
> cannot be with their service setup. And since the problem isn't resolved
> by using a different VNC viewer from my local workstation, the problem
> can't be the VNC client. This just leaves the ssh tunnel - specifically
> the port forwarding - as the only common element.
>
>
by using a different VNC viewer from my local workstation, the problem
can't be the VNC client. This just leaves the ssh tunnel - specifically
the port forwarding - as the only common element.
-A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE
_ physical computers accessing VMs through some ports of my
computer.
For example, redirecting 172.20.14.XX:80 to 10.10.10.30:80. I
will
do that port forwarding for ssh ( port 22 ), http ( port 80 ) and
postgresql ( port 5432 ) connections in a first time.
- You need
Le 29.05.2014 06:56, Igor Cicimov a écrit :
Maybe something like this?
- Kernel config
# sysctl -p
net.ipv4.conf.default.rp_filter = 1
net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1
net.ipv4.tcp_syncookies = 1
net.ipv4.conf.all.log_martians = 1
net.ipv4.tcp_keepalive_time = 60
net.ipv4.tcp_keepalive_intvl = 20
Le 28.05.2014 18:05, Joe a écrit :
On Wed, 28 May 2014 21:25:23 +1000
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:03 PM, Joe j...@jretrading.com wrote:
The point here is that all modern hardware is capable of IPv6, and
even if you aren't using it, malware writers may
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 7:04 PM, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
What I basically want to do, and I do not understand how they ( my
programmer colleagues ) can happily live without that, is a server for
source versionning, bug tracking, wikis, etc. This stuff does not need any
virtual
Le 30.05.2014 12:08, Chris Angelico a écrit :
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 7:04 PM, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org
wrote:
What I basically want to do, and I do not understand how they ( my
programmer colleagues ) can happily live without that, is a server
for
source versionning, bug tracking,
Humpf... finger mistake.
Also, there's fossil if you are in that situation: it's
It's a DVCS which integrate a wiki and a bugtracker.
Sounds really interesting, but I never took time to really play with
it.
So, in a situation where you are the only one to use real tools, and do
not want
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:51 PM, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
Hoping to find something that you can do entirely under your own
control. :)
You mean, be your own boss?
Heh, that's another way of interpreting that statement. But no, what I
meant was some way you can get the test/dev
to have port forwarding working from
172.20.14.XX:80 to 10.10.10.30:80.
Problem is, rules vanished since then, and my memory about the exact
configuration or search keywords too.
And to add to the fun, I remember having discovered after several hours
last week that the port forwarding rules I built
On Wed, 28 May 2014 11:36:03 +0200
berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
I do not think I need ipv6 for now. I'll start with the probably
easier ipv4, and maybe someday I'll experiment with the v6, if I have
the opportunity to work in a v6 LAN.
The point here is that all modern hardware
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:03 PM, Joe j...@jretrading.com wrote:
The point here is that all modern hardware is capable of IPv6, and
even if you aren't using it, malware writers may be. And by default, a
Debian machine is wide open to IPv6, and some of its software is
listening to it. Run a
On Wed, 28 May 2014 21:25:23 +1000
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Chris,
still trying to convince his ISPs that IPv6 is worth supporting
Hard, isn't it?
Several (many?) ISPs in these parts seem to be doing the equivalent of
sticking their fingers in their ears and humming loudly,
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:31 PM, Brad Rogers b...@fineby.me.uk wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2014 21:25:23 +1000
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Chris,
still trying to convince his ISPs that IPv6 is worth supporting
Hard, isn't it?
Several (many?) ISPs in these parts seem to be doing
On Mi, 28 mai 14, 21:39:24, Chris Angelico wrote:
It's off-topic for this list,
CC: and Reply-To: -offtopic
but I would be very curious to know how
much extra, on average, people would pay in order to get an IPv6
netblock. Maybe it really isn't commercially important.
ISP: You can get a
On Mi, 28 mai 14, 21:39:24, Chris Angelico wrote:
It's off-topic for this list,
CC: and Reply-To: -offtopic, this time for real :(
Please disregard the other post
but I would be very curious to know how
much extra, on average, people would pay in order to get an IPv6
netblock. Maybe it
On 28/05/14 14:29, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Mi, 28 mai 14, 21:39:24, Chris Angelico wrote:
It's off-topic for this list,
CC: and Reply-To: -offtopic, this time for real :(
Please disregard the other post
Followup to list just puts it straight back there.
but I would be very curious to
On Wed, 28 May 2014 21:25:23 +1000
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:03 PM, Joe j...@jretrading.com wrote:
The point here is that all modern hardware is capable of IPv6, and
even if you aren't using it, malware writers may be. And by
default, a Debian machine
that port forwarding for ssh ( port 22 ), http ( port 80 ) and
postgresql ( port 5432 ) connections in a first time.
- You need port forwarding only if the physical hosts or their router
doesn't have a route to your virtual LAN.
# iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -d 172.20.14.XX \
-p tcp
and updates
_ physical computers accessing VMs through some ports of my computer. For
example, redirecting 172.20.14.XX:80 to 10.10.10.30:80. I will do
that port forwarding for ssh ( port 22 ), http ( port 80 ) and postgresql (
port 5432 ) connections in a first time.
Thanks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
that port forwarding for ssh ( port 22 ), http ( port 80 ) and
postgresql ( port 5432 ) connections in a first time.
Thanks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
https
On Tue, 27 May 2014 18:24:41 +0200
berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
Hello list.
I am trying to build a virtual network exposing servers accessible
from the LAN.
I have done a lot of searches on the web and it worked last week, but
since then, I have restarted my computer and had the
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Joe j...@jretrading.com wrote:
This package is relatively recent, and when I needed to address this
problem, I had just built a Linux-From-Scratch system, so I took their
init script skeleton and made a pseudo-daemon, entering a set of
iptables commands at
!
I am a newbie both of debian and networking...
Recently I am trying to connect my home laptop(I have a router in my
home) from office. I read several articles on port forwarding. And I
succeeded in opening an 22 port on my router, also I started ssh server on
my home laptop
Hi debianer!
I post a question about port forwarding yesterday and got quick reply, big
thanks!
Now I still have sth. not clear and it can be described as:
I have a laptop in my home, which is connected to my router. Yesterday, I
succeeded in open a ssh port(22) on router, and start ssh server
On 11/10/12 09:53, houkensjtu wrote:
It seems that, not only on the router, but also I should open a specific port
on my laptop, otherwise netcat will not be able to connect from outside my
home.
I wonder why this happens and what is the mechanism behind it.
Is it possible to open a port
on.
Hope this can help you.
Pietro.
-Original Message-
From: robo...@news.nic.it [mailto:robo...@news.nic.it] On Behalf Of houkensjtu
Sent: giovedì 11 ottobre 2012 10:53
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: More on port forwarding(ssh, netcat and amule!)
Hi debianer!
I post
Hi debianer!
I am a newbie both of debian and networking...
Recently I am trying to connect my home laptop(I have a router in my home) from
office. I read several articles on port forwarding. And I succeeded in opening
an 22 port on my router, also I started ssh server on my home laptop
http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
A bit of searching the net on port-forwarding oughta give you the answer.
You probably forgot to forward port 22 on the router to whichever ip
adress your DEBIAN has.
Search around for stuff on your router/ISP combo as they're almost
always
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 08:35:13 -0700 (PDT)
houkensjtu houkens...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi debianer!
I am a newbie both of debian and networking...
Recently I am trying to connect my home laptop(I have a router in my
home) from office. I read several articles on port forwarding. And I
succeeded
On Wed 10 Oct 2012 at 08:35:13 -0700, houkensjtu wrote:
I am a newbie both of debian and networking... Recently I am trying
to connect my home laptop(I have a router in my home) from office. I
read several articles on port forwarding. And I succeeded in opening
an 22 port on my router, also
On Wed 10 Oct 2012 at 19:44:27 +0100, Joe wrote:
[Some good advice snipped]
However you resolve the initial problem, the ssh server is very heavily
targeted by the bad guys, using password checking bots. A quick and
dirty security measure is to forward a non-standard high numbered
external
laptop(I have a router in my
home) from office. I read several articles on port forwarding. And I
succeeded in opening an 22 port on my router, also I started ssh
server on my home laptop.
(suppose my username at home is USER, and my laptop is called DEBIAN)
I did several
Brian於 2012年10月11日星期四UTC+9上午8時00分04秒寫道：
On Wed 10 Oct 2012 at 08:35:13 -0700, houkensjtu wrote:
I am a newbie both of debian and networking... Recently I am trying
to connect my home laptop(I have a router in my home) from office. I
read several articles on port forwarding. And I
On Wednesday, October 10, 2012 08:19:25 PM houkensjtu wrote:
Thanks for great reply!!
I have to apologize for sth... I forgot to say that all these experiments
were done in home on my laptop...omg So, now I solved the problem with
echo 1/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
What is this file? Is
...
Recently I am trying to connect my home laptop(I have a router in my home)
from office. I read several articles on port forwarding. And I succeeded in
opening an 22 port on my router, also I started ssh server on my home laptop.
(suppose my username at home is USER, and my laptop
|
|___|
|
|
__
| *10.0.0.2* |
| --- PC --- |
|_|
On SERVER side I have a port forwarding on tcp 80 to 10.0.0.2, so from
eth1 I can reach PC on 192.168.100.2:80 and this is working fine.
As a new upgrade to my server I added a vpn connection from SERVER to
NET 192.168.1.0 behind VPN
Not a Debian-specific question, but I turn to the best brains that I know.
Assuming a LAN with a router and three machines:
10.0.0.1 Router
10.0.0.2 Computer1
10.0.0.3 Computer2
10.0.0.4 Computer3
The router sits on an outside IP address of 123.45.67.89. There is no
DMZ or port forwarding
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 13:25, Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com wrote:
Not a Debian-specific question, but I turn to the best brains that I know.
Then OT it.
Is there any way an individual from outside the LAN could access a
resource (Apache for instance, or SSH) on Computer1 assuming that he
address of 123.45.67.89. There is no
DMZ or port forwarding assigned on the router to any of the other
machines.
Is there any way an individual from outside the LAN could access a
resource (Apache for instance, or SSH) on Computer1 assuming that he
knows Computer1's LAN IP address? Would
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 15:35, Steven redalert.comman...@gmail.com wrote:
To my knowledge, no, there is not. Only if the traffic is part of an
existing connection created by one of the machines inside your LAN.
Thanks, that is what I suspected.
If he wants access to computer 1, your router
on an outside IP address of 123.45.67.89. There is no
DMZ or port forwarding assigned on the router to any of the other
machines.
Is there any way an individual from outside the LAN could access a
resource (Apache for instance, or SSH) on Computer1 assuming that he
knows Computer1's LAN IP
on an outside IP address of 123.45.67.89. There is no
DMZ or port forwarding assigned on the router to any of the other
machines.
Is there any way an individual from outside the LAN could access a
resource (Apache for instance, or SSH) on Computer1 assuming that he
knows Computer1's LAN IP address? Would
of 123.45.67.89. There is no
DMZ or port forwarding assigned on the router to any of the other
machines.
Is there any way an individual from outside the LAN could access a
resource (Apache for instance, or SSH) on Computer1 assuming that he
knows Computer1's LAN IP address? Would
Hello,
Dotan Cohen a écrit :
Assuming a LAN with a router and three machines:
10.0.0.1 Router
10.0.0.2 Computer1
10.0.0.3 Computer2
10.0.0.4 Computer3
The router sits on an outside IP address of 123.45.67.89. There is no
DMZ or port forwarding assigned on the router to any of the other
Hi.
On 2009年11月12日 07:53, green wrote:
Zhang Weiwu wrote at 2009-11-10 20:36 -0600:
Hello. I have a remote server inside a remote office covered by NAT
masquerade where port forwarding not possible, and a local server in my
local office not covered by NAT masquerade. In order to access
Zhang Weiwu wrote at 2010-09-13 02:23 -0500:
Thank you! Now that I tried it, te apf-client package proved very useful
in my case. I followed your advice almost a year later because I was too
busy with daily business and kept your email as marked for personal
todo for a year or so.
Excellent!
Bonjour,
hier je reçu ma noveau Freebox et en theorie ça marcher...
Je eu surf l'Internet et mon Serveur Mesagerie envoyer les messages
correctement...
Mais, je peu pas connecte à l'exterieure mon Serveur... Le seul truck
marcher est 80. Pas 23, 53, 110 et 993.
Sur la Freebox j'ai:
Michelle Konzack a écrit :
Bonjour,
Bonjour
hier je reçu ma noveau Freebox et en theorie ça marcher...
Je eu surf l'Internet et mon Serveur Mesagerie envoyer les messages
correctement...
Mais, je peu pas connecte à l'exterieure mon Serveur... Le seul truck
marcher est 80. Pas 23,
Salut,
Am 2010-01-12 14:43:33, schrieb Daniel Huhardeaux:
D'ici, nmap -P0 88.168.69.36
PORTSTATE SERVICE
53/tcp open domain
80/tcp open http
110/tcp closed pop3
587/tcp closed submission
993/tcp open imaps
C'est bizzar... Mon serveur bloque rien...
tdpdump sur le serveur
Michelle Konzack a écrit :
C'est bizzar... Mon serveur bloque rien...
tdpdump sur le serveur done aucune info. Pas un seul paquet.
Plusieures persones dit, c'est Free que bloquer la connection
À la vue du nmap, .74 OK, .69 OK et .70 OK *uniquement* pour le 993.
Un telnet sur ce port
pour t aider je me suis permis de faire un nmap sur ton ip :
= nmap -P0 88.168.69.36
Starting Nmap 5.00 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2010-01-12 18:01 CET
Interesting ports on mail.tamay-dogan.net (88.168.69.36):
Not shown: 990 closed ports
PORT STATESERVICE
22/tcp open ssh
25/tcp
Michelle Konzack a écrit :
Salut,
Am 2010-01-12 14:43:33, schrieb Daniel Huhardeaux:
D'ici, nmap -P0 88.168.69.36
PORTSTATE SERVICE
53/tcp open domain
80/tcp open http
110/tcp closed pop3
587/tcp closed submission
993/tcp open imaps
C'est bizzar... Mon serveur bloque
Michelle Konzack a écrit :
[...]
SI 25 marcher pas sur mon serveur, je suis incapable du envoyer cet
message (voix les lignes Received:)
Salut Michelle,
Pour le port 25, c'est particulier. Dans l'interface d'administration de ta freebox (le site
freebox.fr), tu dois cocher ou décocher
Jean-Yves F. Barbier a écrit :
[...]
hon-hon, il faudrait fermer certains ports...
Starting Nmap 5.00 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2010-01-12 18:06 CET
Interesting ports on mail.tamay-dogan.net (88.168.69.36):
Not shown: 989 closed ports
PORT STATESERVICE
22/tcp open ssh
25/tcp open
Daniel Huhardeaux a écrit :
# nmap -P0 88.168.69.36
Starting Nmap 5.00 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2010-01-12 18:22 CET
Interesting ports on mail.tamay-dogan.net (88.168.69.36):
Not shown: 989 closed ports
PORT STATESERVICE
22/tcp open ssh
25/tcp open smtp
53/tcp open
Salut,,
Am 2010-01-12 18:05:18, schrieb webmaster:
pour t aider je me suis permis de faire un nmap sur ton ip :
= nmap -P0 88.168.69.36
Starting Nmap 5.00 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2010-01-12 18:01 CET
Interesting ports on mail.tamay-dogan.net (88.168.69.36):
Not shown: 990 closed ports
Jean-Yves F. Barbier a écrit :
Daniel Huhardeaux a écrit :
# nmap -P0 88.168.69.36
Starting Nmap 5.00 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2010-01-12 18:22 CET
Interesting ports on mail.tamay-dogan.net (88.168.69.36):
Not shown: 989 closed ports
PORT STATESERVICE
22/tcp open ssh
25/tcp
Michelle Konzack a écrit :
Je redemarere l Freebox san changer une seule chose au moin 3 fois...
si free n'a pas changé de politique, ça ne sert à rien: la configuration
se faisant par une page spécifique dans ton login perso chez free.
Grmpf! -- Comment fermer cet port sur le Freebox?
Ici,
Daniel Huhardeaux a écrit :
...
??? chez moi le 25 est filtered, j'avais le 1720, etc. On ne doit pas
avoir la meme notion de l'identique ;-)
nan: pareil à ce que j'ai sorti il-y-a 10'.
--
An Irishman is never at peace except when he's fighting.
--
Lisez la FAQ de la liste avant de poser
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:36, Zhang Weiwu zhangwe...@realss.com wrote:
Hello. I have a remote server inside a remote office covered by NAT
masquerade where port forwarding not possible, and a local server in my
local office not covered by NAT masquerade. In order to access the
remote office
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:36:20AM +0800, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
The problem of this solution is security. I do not want to grant shell
access of local_server to remote_server. What would you recommend me
to do in this case? I could try to limit access of the account used by
remote server ssh -R,
Zhang Weiwu wrote at 2009-11-10 20:36 -0600:
Hello. I have a remote server inside a remote office covered by NAT
masquerade where port forwarding not possible, and a local server in my
local office not covered by NAT masquerade. In order to access the
remote office and hosts in that office, I
Hello. I have a remote server inside a remote office covered by NAT
masquerade where port forwarding not possible, and a local server in my
local office not covered by NAT masquerade. In order to access the
remote office and hosts in that office, I do this:
On remote office server, in a screen
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:36:20AM +0800, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
Hello. I have a remote server inside a remote office covered by NAT
masquerade where port forwarding not possible, and a local server in my
local office not covered by NAT masquerade. In order to access the
remote office and hosts
Alex Samad wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:36:20AM +0800, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
The problem of this solution is security. I do not want to grant shell
access of local_server to remote_server. What would you recommend me to
do in this case? I could try to limit access of the account used by
Hello. We have a great firewall that scans keywords on tcp connections'
raw data, thus I could not use my http proxy server outside of the
firewall because both direct connection to the web server and in-direct
connect to the http proxy are scanned by the firewall.
My trick is to run 'ssh -L' and
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 12:16:22AM +0800, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
Hello. We have a great firewall that scans keywords on tcp connections'
raw data, thus I could not use my http proxy server outside of the
firewall because both direct connection to the web server and in-direct
connect to the http
Merhaba,
Üzerinde debian lenny çalışan bir sunucum var. Fiziksel sunucu
üzerinde ise vmware ile sanal makineler çalışmakta. Makineler
internete NAT ile ulaşmaktalar.
yapmaya çalıştığım şey ise fiziksel makinenin internete bağlanan ayağı
olan eth0 arabiriminin 80 portuna gelen istekleri sanal
Burada NAT işlemi yapıldığı için kuralların NAT tablolarına girilmesi
gerekiyor.
INPUT zinciri içerisinde ayrıca o portu ACCEPT etmenize gerek yok, yani
aşağıdaki gibi tek bir komutla trafik yönlendirmesini yapabilirsiniz:
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to
On 3/3/07, John L Fjellstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Johnno [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello
Need a little bit of help here... eth1 = Internet, eth0 = LAN, will
this work?
iptables -A PREROUTING -t nat -i eth1 -p tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to
192.168.1.50:80
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m
192.168.1.50 -p tcp --sport
80 -j SNAT --to-source your-public-ip-here
so the client get the answer from your-public-ip
Please let me know if this helps, it's been a while for me too, since my
last
handmade firewall.
Cheers!
Giacomo
Here's my port forwarding firewall...eth0 is wan
On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 16:24 +0100, Joe Hart wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Giacomo Montagner wrote:
On 3/3/07, John L Fjellstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Johnno [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello
Need a little bit of help here... eth1 = Internet, eth0 = LAN,
Johnno [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello
Need a little bit of help here... eth1 = Internet, eth0 = LAN, will
this work?
iptables -A PREROUTING -t nat -i eth1 -p tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to
192.168.1.50:80
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW --dport 80 -i eth1 -j ACCEPT
Anything
Hello
Need a little bit of help here... eth1 = Internet, eth0 = LAN, will this
work?
iptables -A PREROUTING -t nat -i eth1 -p tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT --to
192.168.1.50:80
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m state --state NEW --dport 80 -i eth1 -j ACCEPT
Anything on port 80 to goto a internal server
and I reinstalled everything
from scratch using a sarge netinstall CD. (I checked all scripts I
resurrect from the old system, and recompiled all my *own* binaries
from original source code. The script I mention below hasn't been
molested.)
I run the same script for port-forwarding
and I reinstalled everything
from scratch using a sarge netinstall CD. (I checked all scripts I
resurrect from the old system, and recompiled all my *own* binaries
from original source code. The script I mention below hasn't been
molested.)
I run the same script for port-forwarding
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 08:36:15PM -0700, charles norwood wrote:
On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 14:56 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 09:11:14AM -0500, Forrest Smith wrote:
The folks on the Shorewall project have done all this for you:
apt-get install shorewall
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But it doesn't work.
Lines like
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING --protocol tcp -d 216.138.195.194 --dport 27012
-j DNAT --to-destination 172.25.1.5:27012 --verbose
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING --protocol udp -d 216.138.195.194 --dport 27012
-j DNAT
At 1145804173 past the epoch, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 09:11:14AM -0500, Forrest Smith
wrote:
The folks on the Shorewall project have done all this
for you:
Does shorewall find and install the missing kernel
modules. wherever they are? Or does it just use
original source code. The script I mention below hasn't been
molested.)
I run the same script for port-forwarding and masquerading that I used
before the reinstall.
But it doesn't work.
Lines like
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING --protocol tcp -d 216.138.195.194 --dport 27012
-j DNAT --to-destination
reinstalled everything
from scratch using a sarge netinstall CD. (I checked all scripts I
resurrect from the old system, and recompiled all my *own* binaries
from original source code. The script I mention below hasn't been
molested.)
I run the same script for port-forwarding
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 09:11:14AM -0500, Forrest Smith wrote:
The folks on the Shorewall project have done all this for you:
apt-get install shorewall
F.S
Does shorewall find and install the missing kernel modules. wherever
they are? Or does it just use iptables, whose docs say it
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 14:56:13 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
Does shorewall find and install the missing kernel modules. wherever
they are? Or does it just use iptables, whose docs say it tries to
load them (but it is evidently not succeeding).
I *have* the set of iptables
On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 14:56 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 09:11:14AM -0500, Forrest Smith wrote:
The folks on the Shorewall project have done all this for you:
apt-get install shorewall
F.S
Does shorewall find and install the missing kernel modules.
*
ForwardX11 yes
In both cases I can see this message when passing -v option
debug1: Requesting X11 forwarding with authentication spoofing.
and when I try to start xclock I get error:
Error: Can't open display:
So how do I enable X port forwarding?
Juraj
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
enable X port forwarding?
Have you added
X11Forwarding yes
to /etc/ssh/sshd_config, then restart the ssh service? That works for
me...
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
:
Host *
ForwardX11 yes
In both cases I can see this message when passing -v option
debug1: Requesting X11 forwarding with authentication spoofing.
and when I try to start xclock I get error:
Error: Can't open display:
So how do I enable X port forwarding?
Have you added
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 05:25:39AM -0800, Leonid Grinberg wrote:
Yeah, you need to enable it in /etc/ssh/sshd_config
Then, use ssh -X host.domain -l username
(note: it has to be enabled on both sides, and you actually have to
have X on both sides.)
More specifically, you need to ensure that
Bonjour,
Voilà ça fait 1 semaine que je galère, j'éssaille de forwarder le port 80
(serveur web)
vers une machine de mon LAN ou se trouve mon serveur web.
j'ai déclarer la redirection dans le Nat
80 80 192.168.1.4 (il s'agit de la machine en local ou se trouve le serveur
web)
l'adresse
On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 12:09:31PM +, edoyuar reeri wrote:
Bonjour,
Voilà ça fait 1 semaine que je galère, j'éssaille de forwarder le port 80
(serveur web)
vers une machine de mon LAN ou se trouve mon serveur web.
j'ai déclarer la redirection dans le Nat
80 80 192.168.1.4 (il
From: Quentin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-user-french@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Port forwarding Impossible zyxel 650hw-31
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 14:25:54 +0200
On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 12:09:31PM +, edoyuar reeri wrote:
Bonjour,
Voilà ça fait 1 semaine que je galère, j'éssaille de
Subject: Re: Port forwarding Impossible zyxel 650hw-31
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 14:25:54 +0200
On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 12:09:31PM +, edoyuar reeri wrote:
Bonjour,
Voilà ça fait 1 semaine que je galère, j'éssaille de forwarder le port
80
(serveur web)
vers une machine de mon LAN ou se
Salut au départ oui, puis je l'ai remis mais je l'ai désactiver pour qu'il
ne puissent pas accéder à
l'administration depuis l'éxterieur.
From: Quentin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-user-french@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Port forwarding Impossible zyxel 650hw-31
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 14
cela marche très bien.
-Si tu l'attaques depuis l'exterieur sur son IP externe et que tu tombe
sur la page de config de ton routeur, cela voudrait dire que ce dernier
aurait préséance sur le port forwarding ds ce cas il te suffit de
modifier le port d'écoute du serveur web de ton routeur
: Port forwarding Impossible zyxel 650hw-31
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 12:42:15 +
Salut au départ oui, puis je l'ai remis mais je l'ai désactiver pour qu'il
ne puissent pas accéder à
l'administration depuis l'éxterieur.
From: Quentin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-user-french@lists.debian.org
Le mardi 25 octobre 2005 à 13:59 +, edoyuar reeri a écrit :
voici mon une image du log firewall quand je forwarde.
Pas vraiment utile de masquer ton ip sur la dernière ligne vue qu'elle
apparait juste au dessus...
Je n'ai pas vraiment cherché à comprendre, mais mon navigateur me
rebalance
alut à tous merci de m'avoir répondu,
mais j'ai tout fait comme expliqué ici.
nat,firewal
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/4260/firewalllog5dv.png
http://img149.imageshack.us/my.php?image=nat3hn.png
http://img149.imageshack.us/my.php?image=portforward9jd.png
Kumar Appaiah wrote:
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 06:33:28AM -0700, James Vahn wrote:
Kumar Appaiah wrote:
Dear list,
I have been using fetchmail + procmail + exim4 to handle my mail. I
have a setup by which certain messages are received by procmail, and a
copy of some is forwarded to another
1 - 100 of 301 matches
Mail list logo
