Re: Route Nat dead. Does anybody going to support it?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Peter Volkov Alexandrovich wrote:

Of course you are right. I've just tried to explain why I called this kind of
pushing packets into router virtual address. As I said. I think this may be a
wrong term.

I am not arguing aganst this, only that you implied it was only needed when using iptables, not when using route maps, which is not true. It is equally needed (depending your network setup) in both NAT methods.


Regards
Henrik
-
: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux 802.1Q VLAN]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Git]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News and Information]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux PCI]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux