From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Jun 13 2:55:26 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from lexx.zssm.zp.ua (lexx.zssm.zp.ua [212.8.32.8]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AACBB37B406; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 02:55:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.hermes-comp.zp.ua (germes-comp.zssm.zp.ua [212.8.32.132] (may be forged)) by lexx.zssm.zp.ua (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id MAA25994; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 12:48:29 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by server.hermes-comp.zp.ua (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF54238302; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 12:52:39 +0300 (EEST) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 12:52:39 +0300 (EEST) From: Alexander V Zubchenko To: David Wahlstedt Cc: , Subject: Re: natd port forwarding In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020613124309.Q1920-100000@server.hermes-comp.zp.ua> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Greetings! On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, David Wahlstedt wrote: > Thanks ! > It was a typo. I corrected it, made sure the change was on the floppy, > rebooted, but it still doesn't work. > Running "ipfw list" gives the same answer as before the change. Sorry, but i don't understand. You change typo, but it left unchanged? Or You mean that behavior left unchanged? Sorry, it's not clear for me. > I tried netcat on 10.0.0.4: > > nc -l -p 1234 > > And also on 10.0.0.4: > > telnet 217.x.x.x 1234 > "connection refused", it answers. > > The same happens with > > nc -v -p 1234 217.x.x.x > > > Is this the right testing method here ? I think so. > > > rc.conf: > can the following be an error ? Do I have the wrong netmask on ep1 ? > ifconfig_ep0="inet 217.bla.bla.bla netmask 255.255.255.0 up" > ifconfig_ep1="inet 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.128 up" Yes it's seemed strange. AFAIK, those netmasks r used only when somebody need to split internal network into subnets. Is it Your case? And is 10.0.0.4 configured with same netmask? If yes, all ok. If no, this is main suspect. > natd.conf: You can't set netmask in this conf, so, who can b sured that natd not assume it as 255.255.255.0 > config> port ed0 0x0340 > config> irq ed0 4 > config> iomem ed0 0x00000000 > config> port ed1 0x0320 > config> iomem ed1 0x00000000 AFAIC, You don't need this, because edX not found. To increase clearness and performance, mayb better way to change it to 'disable edX'? But this is OT. Just a comment. With respect, Alexander V Zubchenko, E-Mail: stalker@hermes-comp.zp.ua System Administrator, WWW: http://www.hermes-comp.zp.ua/ Hermes-comp, Ukraine, Zaporizhzhya, Geroev Stalingrada 50 phone/fax: +380 612 64-19-72 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message