> -----Original Message----- > From: netfilter-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:netfilter-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 12:41 AM > To: netfilter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Having NAT problems > > > On April 1, 2004 03:45 pm, Antony Stone wrote: > > On Thursday 01 April 2004 9:32 pm, Adam Kennedy wrote: > > > On Thu, 1 Apr 2004 21:19:45 +0100, Antony Stone wrote > > > > > > > Okay, how's this then - please post all the rules > which you think > > > > are needed for this pcAnywhere setup to work (with > suitable partial > > > > obscuring of IPs if you wish). Then we'll tell you if > we can see > > > > something missing? > > > > > > That's actually what I wound up doing in the last post. > That's all > > > the rules on the box save for a few NAT entries which I just > > > commented out. Commenting them out and re-running the > file didn't do > > > anything. I'm at my wits end. > > > > In that case let's see if there's something strange about > the protocol > > pcAnywhere uses. Set up a similar DNAT rule for something > we know about, > > like ssh (or http, or any other service you happen to be > running on an > > internal server), and see if you can connect to that from > the outside > > world. > > > > If you can, then there's obviously something about pcAnywhere which > > either doesn't like NAT, or isn't sufficiently simple to work on a > > single destination port. I believe that pcAnywhere also requires UDP port 5632 to be open. Cheers, Micha
