similar to: Forward all traffic from public IP A to public IP B?

Is there a way to add a rule to the nat table (CentOS 5.7) that would alter the port number of tcp packets destined for the server itself? I have ip_forwarding enabled, but the packets don't seem to hit the prerouting chain. I have the following redirect rule in the prerouting table. I also tried DNAT, but if the packets don't hit PREROUTING, it won't work either. iptables -t nat

Are you saying that REDIRECT hasn't been or that it has suddenly stopped working? My guess would be that it hasn't been working. Here's why: The REDIRECT target is in the NAT table because it is designed to redirect the port of packets destined for the interface they arrived on. If I understand right your situation is like this: (Users) -----> (eth2) <Bridge (192.168.0.3)>

Been running this for quite a while and noticed that have intermittent problems getting out. Find that if I ping the same site from 2 computers it may work on one and fail on the other. Also was surprised that some time they are going out different interfaces at the same time. Seems to work all the time from the firewall. Running 2.6.10 kernel with the multipath routing patches on a debian

Firstly I don''t think this is a shorewall problem, but I suspect shorewall might be able to solve it for me. I''ve posted this so far at http://mandrakeusers.org/index.php?showtopic=18942 I''ve stumble upon a problem that has me stumped I have a multipath router using 2.6.8.1 with patches from here http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/#routes basic setup: ___ ISP1

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=429 ------- Additional Comments From laforge@netfilter.org 2006-01-25 11:00 MET ------- Please specifically tell us about the exact kernel version, any patches that you might have applied, and the iptables version that you're using. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You

I'm having trouble getting port forwarding working on my one box. I have 2 incoming internet connections. I have 2 servers on these connections. pubinternet privinternet eth0:x.x.x.x eth0:y.y.y.y eth1:10.10.10.1 eth1:10.10.10.4 I need to be able to port forward traffic

Hello,=09 =09I have a setup where the lan zone, eth0, will be forwarded through a=20 transpanent proxy (dansguardian and squid with squidguard) for web access= =2E =20 Now I want a few computers that are part of the lan zone to be free from = the=20 time, content restrictions. I tryed making a sub zone called webgp, and=20 adding a rule that alows webgp to wan on 80. I then added these few=20

Hello all: I''ve got a confusing issue. I had a working shorewall configuration (based on the two interface model) using DNAT for redirection to my HTTP server. The HTTP server is on my inside network (I know - bad juju, but one thing at a time). I changed my configuration this morning to use views in my BIND (named) configuration. Everyone outside the firewall is able to get in

Hello, I am running a web server on my internal network. Clients outside the web can view it but inside the network, they get page cannot be displayed. I have tried shorewall faq 2 but it still doesn''t work. interfaces #ZONE INTERFACE BROADCAST OPTIONS net ppp0 detect dhcp,routefilter,norfc1918,routeback masq eth1 detect routeback masq #INTERFACE SUBNET ADDRESS ppp0 eth1 #LAST LINE --

This patch adds an ACM hook into the network scripts (/etc/xen/scripts). It adds iptables rules that enforce mandatory access control on network packets exchanged between virtual interfaces. If ACM is active, this patch sets the default FORWARD policy in Dom0 to DROP and adds iptables ACCEPT rules between vifs that belong to domains that are permitted to share (determined by using the

On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 06:31:41PM -0400, Rhys Ferris wrote: >Hello all, > >I’m currently trying to figure out how to forward ports to guests that are on a NAT Network. I have followed the directions on https://wiki.libvirt.org/page/Networking under the “Forwarding Incoming Connections” Section and get connection refused when attempting to connect. > >System: Ubuntu Server 18.04.1

(anonymous post) I have a simple 2 interface firewall setup and all is good, almost. I am hosting virtual websites and DNS behind shorewall no problem. However I am trying to use SFTP via a different port number and have no luck even though Putty works well. Is there anything weird to sftp and shorewall? My lab uses a different firewall (firestarter) and it works OK. I am using; DNAT net

Thanks for the reply! output: net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1 What do you mean "The out:any and" Anywhere else I can look as to why the connection isn't going? Do I need some kind of listener at that port on the host? I'm not even seeing the packet count on the prerouting chain increase when the connection attempts are made. On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 8:58 AM Martin Kletzander

Some day ago, a friend post one problem for mi. whist this texts: I have a server whit 2 interfaces of network, where eth0 is the interfaces connetc to internet and eth1 to the internal network. This server hace a Squid only, but i setting the iptables for protection to the server. Iptables run from script and in this script i setting the redirection for the other server in my internal network to

I have a simple requirement/test I'm trying to perform, but having difficulty. I have a system with 2 interfaces, BoxA: eth0? 172.26.50.102 eth1? 192.101.77.62 My goal is to have a tcp port built on BoxA such that hosts on the 192.101.77.0/24 network can reach a port on a different box on the 172.26.0.0/16 network. The target system is 172.26.10.120?? tcp/22 The port I wish to build is

Hi, I have a default class for my un-marked traffic (prio 5) and a prio 0 class for the important stuff, but I do not understand why my download traffic is duplicated in both. It work fine for my upload traffic (same setting except the red class but I have the same result if I create an esfq instead). Any comments/information will be appreciated. Below my config : tc commands from my scirpt :

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=714 lizhao09 at huawei.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lizhao09 at huawei.com --- Comment #15 from lizhao09 at huawei.com 2013-09-09 04:48:17 CEST --- Here is another case related to this

I'm trying to do some simple tcp port forwarding [root at wcmisdlin02 ~]# cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward 0 [root at wcmisdlin02 ~]# /bin/echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward [root at wcmisdlin02 ~]# cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward 1 [root at wcmisdlin02 ~]# iptables --list Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination RH-Firewall-1-INPUT all --

Hi, I have a linux-box with 3 eth, 2 of us go into 2 ISP. My localnet is masquerade with this rule: Chain PREROUTING (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination SNAT all -- 10.0.0.0/16 anywhere to:211.56.233.186 SNAT all --

On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 8:58 AM Jeffrey Walton <noloader at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Everyone, > > We rent a CentOS 7 VM from GoDaddy. We received a warning about > excessive cpu usage, and a threat to cancel our service. We tracked it > down to Apache and someone hammering our web server. > > The offending host is 59.64.129.175. To err on the side of caution we >