On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Aton wrote: > >1: > > > > ipmasqadm portfw -a -P tcp -L (local addr) 80 -R (masq'd addr) 80 > > > > seems to set up the forward I want. What I read in the docs > > indicates that the return ports should already be covered by > > the normal masq behavior. Is this true, or do I need to set up > > a return path? > > That should work fine, but I would HIGHLY recommend moving a 2.4 based > kernel and use iptables. The functionality is emmensely more powerful. Yeah, I think the stateful forwarding connections sound nifty. But I think I'll get this one little forward working before I confuse myself!<g> > Its waitng to resolve names. Use ipchains -L -n to output in numerical > output only. Thanks! Mike H. said the same thing and it must be true since you're both right! -- "To misattribute a quote is unforgivable." --Anonymous