Subject: Re: IPNAT rules?
To: None <current-users@netbsd.org>
From: Space Case <wormey@eskimo.com>
List: current-users
Date: 08/08/1998 23:53:18
On Aug 8, 10:18pm, nverenin wrote:
>Actually, I don't think any of the *IX ip filtering/translating systems
>(ipmasq/ipfw,ipnat/ipf) support static NAT either. It would seem to be
>something only found in commercial firewall software. No reason why
>something like ipf couldn't support it; it's probably not a highly
>requested feature, though, and it would not work with certain types of
>systems (cable modems come to mind)...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Huh? That's exactly the reason I've been struggling with getting this PC up
and running on NetBSD, to put a network of Macs behind it instead of just the
one now connected to the cable modem. You mean my efforts have been in vain?
~Steve
--
Steve Allen - wormey@eskimo.com http://www.eskimo.com/~wormey/ ICQ 6709819
Faith is the quality that enables you to eat blackberry jam on a picnic
without looking to see whether the seeds move.
Contrary to popular belief, Unix is user friendly.
It just happens to be selective about who it makes friends with.
-Kyle Hearn <kyle@intex.net>
Good day to let down old friends who need help.