From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robby Workman Subject: Re: Filtered Port Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:44:05 -0600 Message-ID: <43DF85C5.4080804@rlworkman.net> References: <43DF6C38.6010204@mail.bloomfield.k12.mo.us> <61929.193.173.147.3.1138716397.squirrel@webmail.sterenborg.info> <43DF7196.6070606@mail.bloomfield.k12.mo.us> <58058.193.173.147.3.1138718408.squirrel@webmail.sterenborg.info> <43DF7CF1.4060607@mail.bloomfield.k12.mo.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <43DF7CF1.4060607@mail.bloomfield.k12.mo.us> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org Scott Mayo wrote: > Rob Sterenborg wrote: >> In that case you may want to allow forwarding ;-).. >> >> $ipt -A FORWARD -i -o -d \ >> -p tcp --dport 3389 -j ACCEPT >> > > This did not let it go through either. It must not be the iptables > causing it. I took everything out of my rules except for the PREROUTING > rule above and my POSTROUTING rule for SNAT and I am getting the same > thing. > > I am not sure what else would be blocking this, unless it is the > upstream ISP. I don't think it is, but I have sent them an email to > make sure. Only thing this machine is used for is to be a filter using > IPTABLES, Squid and Dansguardian. Scott: Are the counters showing any packets hitting those rules? RW -- http://rlworkman.net