On Tue, 5 Mar 2002, Andy Eager wrote: > Certainly pretty good as far as a basic explanation goes, problem is > that masquerading is not yet up to the level of ipchains and thats what > most people want. (One IP address, masqueraded to many machines for use > with ftp, realaudio etc). I still reckon that ipchains with a 2.2 > kernel is still the simplest and most generally accepted way to do > firewalling if you want particular services masqueraded.
I'm interested to know your reasoning here. What, exactly, doesn't work under iptables? I have a 2.4 kernel running iptables, and it seems to do everything fine - telnet, ssh, ftp, ICQ, irc, real audio, http, https - I haven't found anything yet that _doesn't_ work. So, what am I missing? DaZZa -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
