From owner-freebsd-questions  Sun Feb  2 02:43:57 1997
Return-Path: <owner-questions>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id CAA12641
          for questions-outgoing; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 02:43:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gatekeeper.barcode.co.il (gatekeeper.barcode.co.il [192.116.93.17])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id CAA12625
          for <questions@freebsd.org>; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 02:43:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from smap@localhost) by gatekeeper.barcode.co.il (8.7.5/8.6.12) id MAA16720; Sun, 2 Feb 1997 12:41:38 +0200 (IST)
X-Authentication-Warning: gatekeeper.barcode.co.il: smap set sender to <nadav@barcode.co.il> using -f
Received: from localhost.barcode.co.il(127.0.0.1) by gatekeeper.barcode.co.il via smap (V1.3)
	id sma016702; Sun Feb  2 12:41:18 1997
Message-ID: <32F46F52.32F7@barcode.co.il>
Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 12:41:22 +0200
From: Nadav Eiron <nadav@barcode.co.il>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4m)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mitch@hardware.com
CC: questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FWTK, IPFW,or Socks
References: <199701312304.PAA26368@proxy1.ba.best.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Mitch James wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> I have one static IP and a private network connected through my FreeBSD
> system.  Using C Mott's version of PPP for NAT right now.  I want to
> be able to have http requests on port 80 to be forwarded to one of
> the machines using the 192.168.x.x addresses.  If I understand from
> earlier disscussions, I can do this by using one of three processes.
> FWTK, IPFW or Socks.  My question is which in your opinion would be
> best to use?  Which would offer the most flexibilty/less hastle, for
> future changes with my network?  Thank you in advance.
> Cheers,
> mitch
> _____________________________________________________
>  Mitch James               Living Near Latte' Land
>  mitch@hardware.com      James Lumber & Ace Hardware
>  www.hardware.com      www.hardware.com/complist.html

>From what I unedrstand, you want to have a server that will appear to
run on port 80 of your official address but will actually be running on
an internal machine, right? I think that in this case the TIS FWTK will
be the easiest solution. You'll only need to build http-gw out of it,
run it on port 80 and tell it that it's default http server is your
internal machine.

Nadav