From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Alexander W. Janssen" Subject: Re: Counter Strike FOWARDING? Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 23:31:39 +0100 Sender: netfilter-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <20030308223139.GA9646@ynfonatic.de> References: <20030308203434.17890.qmail@web40209.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="KsGdsel6WgEHnImy" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030308203434.17890.qmail@web40209.mail.yahoo.com> Errors-To: netfilter-admin@lists.netfilter.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: To: Netfilter Mailinglist --KsGdsel6WgEHnImy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 12:34:34PM -0800, SBlaze wrote: > iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p TCP --dport 27015 -j DNAT --to-destinati= on > 192.168.1.25:27015 That rule is ok, but you should include a rule in the FORWARD chain which actually allows the rule. Portforwarding is ok, as long as you don't forbid= it later: iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp --dport 27015 -d 192.168.1.25 -j ACCEPT Don't know if the Counterstrike-port is correct though... But i guess you k= now what you're doing. Alex. --=20 "Mr Data, when I said 'Fire at Will', I didn't mean for you to be so litera= l." Instructions for use of this post: Insert tounge in cheek. Read as normal. --KsGdsel6WgEHnImy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Weitere Infos: siehe http://www.gnupg.org iEYEARECAAYFAj5qb0oACgkQEMMZKORQoYIn5QCdGoTiCwD4uLoZge137q6Gqt6M B/IAn312xzdYM7CACRZAZhvyHmvJwCEZ =AJS8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --KsGdsel6WgEHnImy--