On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 10:37:03AM +0100, Thierry Du Tre wrote:
> Pablo, thanks for your continued reviewing effort.
> We went forward with my last proposal but I'll send an updated patchset soon.
> (Although it might take a while 'cause currently quite busy with other stuff.)
Thanks for your
On 06-03-18 00:41, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> Hi Thierry,
>
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 12:31:26PM +0100, Thierry Du Tre wrote:
>> Op 30/01/2018 om 14:02 schreef Thierry Du Tre:
>>> This is a patch proposal to support shifted ranges in portmaps.
>>> (i.e. tcp/udp incoming port 5000-5100 on WAN
Hi Thierry,
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 12:31:26PM +0100, Thierry Du Tre wrote:
>
> Op 30/01/2018 om 14:02 schreef Thierry Du Tre:
> > This is a patch proposal to support shifted ranges in portmaps.
> > (i.e. tcp/udp incoming port 5000-5100 on WAN redirected to LAN
> > 192.168.1.5:2000-2100)
> >
>
Op 30/01/2018 om 14:02 schreef Thierry Du Tre:
> This is a patch proposal to support shifted ranges in portmaps.
> (i.e. tcp/udp incoming port 5000-5100 on WAN redirected to LAN
> 192.168.1.5:2000-2100)
>
> Currently DNAT only works for single port or identical port ranges.
> (i.e. ports
This is a patch proposal to support shifted ranges in portmaps.
(i.e. tcp/udp incoming port 5000-5100 on WAN redirected to LAN
192.168.1.5:2000-2100)
Currently DNAT only works for single port or identical port ranges.
(i.e. ports 5000-5100 on WAN interface redirected to a LAN host while original
