you need to change some things in /etc/rc.sysinit in order to modules work again. check for /proc/ksyms in that file and change it to /proc/kallsyms. then do a depmod -a maybe these changes could help you http://thomer.com/linux/migrate-to-2.6.html hope it helps Hello Jan, Monday, February 16, 2004, 7:13:48 AM, you wrote: JK> Hi list JK> I have search google for this error most of my weekend, and I cannot get JK> the answer :( JK> I have upgraded my kernel to 2.6.1 and made all the iptables stuff as JK> modules. JK> I can load all modules by hand perfectly, but still i get this error: JK> #Iptables -L JK> iptables v1.2.9: can't initialize iptables table `filter': Table does JK> not exist (do you need to insmod?) JK> Perhaps iptables or your kernel needs to be upgraded. JK> I have reinstalled iptables and done depmod -a JK> I have installed module-init-tools-2.0-pre10 JK> It seems like it cannot mount modules automaticly, any ideas? JK> Which modules should absolutly be loaded, to make iptables work? JK> Could it be, that i am missing a JK> iptables-need-to-be-installed-to-make-iptables-work-for-kernel-2.6.x-pac JK> ket? JK> Thanks a lot JK> -----Original Message----- JK> From: netfilter-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx JK> [mailto:netfilter-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Antony Stone JK> Sent: 13. februar 2004 18:13 JK> To: netfilter JK> Subject: Re: Routing problem JK> On Friday 13 February 2004 4:30 pm, Carlos Fernandez Sanz wrote: >> > > Before you ask: I can't connect this special computer to the same JK> place >> > > I connect the linux box (which would be the obvious solution) JK> because >> > > the carrier expects traffic to come from one WAN IP, owned by the JK> linux >> > > box. >> > >> > How do they expect you to use any of the other IPs in the pool they JK> have >> > given you? >> >> I do use them by redirecting traffic from the linux box to the JK> destination >> boxes (such as all trafic for public IP 2 goes to 192.168.21.2, for >> example). This works fine, *except* in this particular case, where any >> NATing is not an option. I need the computer behind the linux box to >> actually own the public address, because it signs packets with it. JK> I still don't understand. One of your above statements must be JK> incorrect: JK> - either the ISP requires all your outgoing traffic to come from a JK> single JK> public address, JK> - or you can send traffic from IP1, IP2, IP3 etc as you wish. JK> If the first is true (you have to send all traffic from just a single JK> address) JK> then I don't see how you can do NAT from IP2 to 192.168.21.2, because JK> the JK> reply packets going back out to the Internet are going to have the JK> source JK> address (after de-NATting) of IP2 - therefore you *are* being allowed to JK> send JK> from more than one public IP. JK> If the second is true (you can send from IP1, IP2, IP3 etc as you wish) JK> then JK> as you said in the first place, you can connect the user who wants to JK> use JK> some nasty protocol which embeds OSI layer 3 information into OSI layer JK> 7 JK> traffic to the same place as your existing Linux box and give them a JK> real JK> public IP of their own. JK> What does your ISP claim will happen if you use more than one of your JK> assigned JK> pool of IP addresses for the source address of outgoing traffic? JK> Antony. -- Best regards, Alexis mailto:alexis@xxxxxxxxxxxx
