Hello,
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 08:44:15PM +, Michael James Daffin wrote:
> Would it not just be easier to give the computers the 158... addresses (via
> dhcp or staticly)?
Very common to have to do NAT like this when communicating between
two networks which use the same ranges of RFC1918 addr
Nope, if you want to statically map between two networks, you can do it with a
single iptables rule. The trick here is to use the NETMAP target. A simple
example:
http://capcorne.wordpress.com/2009/03/24/natting-a-network-range-with-netmapiptables/
James Bensley wrote:
...
>
>Ah in that
On Jan 30, 2012 8:44 PM, "Michael James Daffin" wrote:
>
> Would it not just be easier to give the computers the 158... addresses
(via dhcp or staticly)?
>
You would have thought so.
The problem is this:
pc is configured at the factory with ip address 192.168.1.1
The same pc is put in each remote
Would it not just be easier to give the computers the 158... addresses (via
dhcp or staticly)?
On Jan 30, 2012 5:39 PM, "James Courtier-Dutton"
wrote:
>
> On 30 January 2012 17:21, James Bensley wrote:
>
> > Are you referring to dynamic pools per chance?
> > http://lists.netfilter.org/pipermail/
On 30 January 2012 17:39, James Courtier-Dutton wrote:
> On 30 January 2012 17:21, James Bensley wrote:
>
>> Are you referring to dynamic pools per chance?
>> http://lists.netfilter.org/pipermail/netfilter/2001-March/008924.html
>>
>> This is an example of mapping 192.168.1.0/24 to another /24 bu
On 30 January 2012 17:21, James Bensley wrote:
> Are you referring to dynamic pools per chance?
> http://lists.netfilter.org/pipermail/netfilter/2001-March/008924.html
>
> This is an example of mapping 192.168.1.0/24 to another /24 but
> dynamically, so 192.168.1.17 might not become 10.0.0.17, it
On 30 January 2012 15:49, James Courtier-Dutton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I understand how to do network address and port translation in Linux
> in a many to one type setup that you might normally get on a ADSL
> line.
>
> What I have not done before is network address translation but
> preserving the port
On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:49:53 +
James Courtier-Dutton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I understand how to do network address and port translation in Linux
> in a many to one type setup that you might normally get on a ADSL
> line.
>
> What I have not done before is network address translation but
> preserv
another way is to do 1:1 NAT if u have multiple WAN IPs or remove NAT
altogether.
NAT is not security.
Sent from an HTC Mobile. Expect worse typos and grammar
Ian Grody wrote:
>The feature you are looking for is static port mapping. Ive never used linux
>box for natting so anyone who knows i
The feature you are looking for is static port mapping. Ive never used linux
box for natting so anyone who knows iptables will help.
Sent from an HTC Mobile. Expect worse typos and grammar
James Courtier-Dutton wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I understand how to do network address and port translation in Lin
Hi,
I understand how to do network address and port translation in Linux
in a many to one type setup that you might normally get on a ADSL
line.
What I have not done before is network address translation but
preserving the port numbers.
So, if the private side of the box is 192.168.1.0/24
and the
11 matches
Mail list logo