Dan Swartzendruber wrote:
At 04:33 PM 11/1/2005, you wrote:
Count me in on SNAT/DNAT. It has been used for a long time and I for one
think it's very descriptive and logical.
Seconded.
How is that better than a circuit level gateway? I lean towards that
sort of thing since it reduces
ok, I guess this means there is no solution for this problem yet ?
I'll have to wait a bit ?
e.On 11/1/05, Bill Marquette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/1/05, alan walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [alan walters] I have been thinking about this a lot recently. I was wondering if rules for squid
Your thread kind of got hijacked. You're problem was addressed in a
reply to you, not to Alan. Looking, the Port Forward screen doesn't
appear to have a 'not' option. So yes, right now, I'd say there's no
quick solution, without code.
--Bill
On 11/1/05, Etienne Ledoux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Count me in on SNAT/DNAT. It has been used for a long time and I for one
think it's very descriptive and logical.
-lsf
-Original Message-
From: Bill Marquette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 1. november 2005 15:13
To: discussion@pfsense.com
Subject: Re: [pfSense-discussion] how do I
At 04:33 PM 11/1/2005, you wrote:
Count me in on SNAT/DNAT. It has been used for a long time and I for one
think it's very descriptive and logical.
Seconded.
On 10/31/05, Etienne Ledoux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm using pfsense to redirect all outgoing http traffic to a transparent
proxy. But I need to not redirect a specific range when browsing to that
specific range. pf supports not rdr as well as other options to achieve
this. But I can't
