[RE: [RE: [RE: [lug] Sending POP email thru firewall]]]

[Justin]

So is it safe to say that any masquerading that entries that came as a result
of 'netstat -M' or 'ipchains -LM' before were only things being masq'd by my
loaded masq modules (ie: ip_masq_irc, etc)? Not by the ipchains MASQ entry
itself? Or am I confused? :-)


"George Sexton" <gsexton at mhsoftware.com> wrote:
> It kills masquerading off totally.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: lug-admin at lug.boulder.co.us [mailto:lug-admin at lug.boulder.co.us]On
> > Behalf Of Justin
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 3:36 PM
> > To: lug at lug.boulder.co.us
> > Subject: Re: [RE: [RE: [lug] Sending POP email thru firewall]]
> > 
> > 
> > This doesn't work for MASQ'ing in general or when trying to send 
> > email thru
> > the firewall?
> > 
> > justin
> > 
> > "George Sexton" <gsexton at mhsoftware.com> wrote:
> > > Change:
> > > 
> > > ipchains -A forward -i $EXTERNAL_INTERFACE -s $LOCALNET_1 -j MASQ
> > > 
> > > to
> > > 
> > > ipchains -A forward -s $LOCALNET_1 -j MASQ
> > > 
> > > What you are attempting to do makes logical sense, but I know from
> > > experience it doesn't work.
> > > 
> > > I got bit severely by this a couple of weeks ago, and it took 
> > me a while to
> > > get sorted out.
> > > 
> > > George Sexton
> > > MH Software, Inc.
> > > Voice: 303 438 9585
> > > http://www.mhsoftware.com
> > > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug


____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com.