[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
} I though that since it was build into the kernel it also modified the
} code for creating sockets so user sockets where from 1024-61000,
} rather than 1024-64k. (In theory you should be able to place MASQ in
} any 4k range and have it configure that regular socket calls
At 14:42 -0600 2/4/99, Fuzzy Fox wrote:
>Clifford Hammerschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I though that since it was build into the kernel it also modified the
>> code for creating sockets so user sockets where from 1024-61000,
>> rather than 1024-64k. (In theory you should be able to pla
Clifford Hammerschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >#define PORT_MASQ_BEGIN 61000
> >#define PORT_MASQ_END(PORT_MASQ_BEGIN+4096)
>
> I though that since it was build into the kernel it also modified the
> code for creating sockets so user sockets where from 1024-61000,
> rather th
>/*
> * Linux ports don't normally get allocated above 32K.
> * I used an extra 4K port-space
> */
>
>#define PORT_MASQ_BEGIN61000
>#define PORT_MASQ_END (PORT_MASQ_BEGIN+4096)
>
>You could adjust these numbers to anything you like. Be warned, though,
>that the lo
Clifford Hammerschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >It sounds like your ISP is filtering traffic which has a source port in
> >the masq port range (61000-65535).
>
> Wouldn't that possible screw up a lot of things? (Other than MASQ)
No.
> I imagine MASQ must do something to prevent "regular
>It sounds like your ISP is filtering traffic which has a source port in
>the masq port range (61000-65535). If this is true, they have
>effectively shut off your ability to use IP Masquerade. Perhaps you
>should call them and ask.
>
Wouldn't that possible screw up a lot of things? (Other than
