From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Dec 8 1:12:37 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BBCD37B401 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 01:12:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.econolodgetulsa.com (mail.econolodgetulsa.com [198.78.66.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2829843EBE for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 01:12:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from user@mail.econolodgetulsa.com) Received: from mail (user@mail [198.78.66.163]) by mail.econolodgetulsa.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gB898mZb057253; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 01:12:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from user@mail.econolodgetulsa.com) Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 01:08:48 -0800 (PST) From: Josh Brooks To: "Scott A. Moberly" Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: port redirect with ipfw NOT NAT (not NAT) In-Reply-To: <43498.65.221.169.187.1038347709.squirrel@mail.karamazov.org> Message-ID: <20021208010714.J77087-100000@mail.econolodgetulsa.com> 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 > Have you tried something like: > > add 01000 fwd 10.10.10.10,5050 tcp from any to 10.10.10.10 50 When I do this, I get: ipfw: getsockopt(IP_FW_ADD): Invalid argumentipfw: getsockopt(IP_FW_ADD): Invalid argument Any ideas ? Is there any reason why port forwarding with ipfw is special and annoying ? Or is there really something qualitatively different about this action that warrants this behavior ? thanks! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message