similar to: Strange POP3 problem

Dear All I have added the following line to /etc/shorewall/rules: ACCEPT net fw tcp 4662 However, the program aMule continues to give me the following error: NG : Your 4662 port is not reachable. Any further ideas? Thanks in advance, Paul

class wrote on 06/10/2004 11:18:48: > Hello, I have the following situation: > > 192.168.176.0/24 ------ A ========== B ------ 192.168.177.0/24 > 192.168.176.2 pop3 ipsec > racoon > > > policy: (Machine A and B) > ------- > loc vpn ACCEPT > vpn loc ACCEPT > all

class wrote on 06/10/2004 11:18:48: > Hello, I have the following situation: > > 192.168.176.0/24 ------ A ========== B ------ 192.168.177.0/24 > 192.168.176.2 pop3 ipsec > racoon > > > policy: (Machine A and B) > ------- > loc vpn ACCEPT > vpn loc ACCEPT > all

I just installed Fedora Core 3 uname -r 2.6.9-1.667 I got the latest shorewall''s rpm: http://www.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/2.2/shorewall-2.2.0/shorewall-2.2.0-1 .noarch.rpm Made my changes Attempted to run shorewall and got: [root@demo shorewall]# shorewall start ERROR: Can''t find iptables executable I haven''t seen this before. I tried to go through all the

i ask here after give up reading and following all the documentation.. i got 3 nic eth0:222.222.222.222 netmask:255.255.255.252 gateway:222.222.222.221 eth1:10.10.10.254 netmask:255.255.255.0 gateway:blank eth2:10.10.11.254 netmask:255.255.255.0 gateway: blank i''m running redhat9, and shorewall2.2.2 eth0 connected to dsl modem ( static ip ) eth1 connected to d-link router ( for

I''m doing more releases of 1.4.* to try to work around the absurd way in which the 2.6 kernel supports ipsec. 1.4.10 will provide a means for excluding multiple destination hosts/subnets from masquerade/SNAT. -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net

Having moved from a "cascading LANs" configuration to two independent LANs on eth0 and eth1, I still get some "state INVALID" for which I am not sure what the cause is. Can somebody help me understand its probable origin? Thanks, Costantino [see attachment]

Tom, I am NOT subscribed (yet). I dropped SuSeFirewall2 in favor of shorewall to get past the configuration hurdles I as experiencing. At the moment, when my SuSe 9.1 starts up, I can see shorewall processing the rules, policies, etc. and I see no errors and then moves on with the rest of the SuSe boot process . However, no traffic passes through using the rules. I run an iptables -L and I

Having study a number of documents on linux traffic shaper, I started to setup my shaping rules in my network. My linux box is running RH AS3 U3, shorewall 2.0.9. It is using PPPoE connected to the Internet firewall: eth0: connect to the adsl modem eth1: private net ppp0: virtual dial up interface for pppoe There is a ftp server on the private net It is listen for port 21 and configured

Lorenzo Martignoni at Univesita` degli Studi di Milano in Milan has established a mirror of the Shorewall web site. http://italy.shorewall.net http://cert-it.dico.unimi.it/shorewall Thanks Lorenzo! -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net PGP Public Key \

[newbie question] Before using Shorewall I used to manually write some very short iptables rules which where probably much poorer than what this Shorewall gem does but I could "follow" them very easily. Now reading the output of iptable -L gives me a terrible headache. Is there some tool that graphs the rules in order to "see" them better ? For instance I was experiencing

http://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta ftp://shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/Beta -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net

Hello, We are using shorewall-3.0.7-1, I was tried the video conference server doesn''t via shorewall that was no problem, can I upgrade shorewall version to fix this problem ? our boss need use video conference this few days, so this is emergency. Thx ~~ --------------------------------- Yahoo! 網上安全攻略，教你如何防範黑客! 了解更多

This article describes how to implement "Port Knocking" in Shorewall. http://shorewall.net/PortKnocking.html -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool Shoreline, \ http://shorewall.net Washington USA \ teastep@shorewall.net PGP Public Key \ https://lists.shorewall.net/teastep.pgp.key

Hello, I reinstalled my Slackware 10.1 a few days ago, before i did that i stored all files in /etc/shorewall to an external HDD. After reinstallation was complete i installed shorewall and restored the config files i backed up before, but now if the FW is running i can´t ping the adsl modem and so i can´t connect to the internet using pptp. Note, it worked before with exactly the same

Hello, Please see the following picture: http://www.wilson-kwok.com/pptp.jpg I used one to one NAT from 210.0.0.1 to 192.168.0.2 for web server, and then use port forwarding from 210.0.0.1 to 192.168.0.3 for pptp server, but I cannot connect from my home to pptp server. Here is the nat file: 210.0.0.1 eth0:2 192.168.0.2 Here is the rules

Hi all, I moved wshaper 1.1 cbq file to tcstart, but none of my tcrules are being observed. The only way I can set the marks is by editing the tcstart file. Is there a way to incorporate for tcstart to read and apply my set marks in tcrules? Thank you, ~Andrew Nady.

I have problem with IP public, my Network configuration [wireless] <------> [Router] <------ > [ Linux proxy ] < ------ > [Client ] IP configuration [202.123.123.1] <------->[202.123.123.2 and 192.168.0.1] < ------ > [192.168.0.2 and 202.123.123.3] < ------ > [202.123.123.4] this configuration will use IP 202.123.123.2 on internet how to config my network

Hi all, is it possible configure Shorewall in bridge mode and, in the same box, utilize Squid in transparent mode? I''m triing to do this, but the REDIRECT rule doesn''t work. I''ve already read http://www.shorewall.net/bridge.html to configure the bridge and work fine for me, but when I add the rule for transparent proxy

Hi, At the moment I am controlling my LAN client access to the Inet by their MAC address. Currently I am putting their MAC address in the rules file - now the number of the PC that I want to manage is getting more and more and it is not practicle to do this way anymore. My question is, how can I have their MAC address in other separate file? Regards http://www.debian.org/consultants/#Malaysia