On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 06:07:15PM -0400, Jason Opperisano wrote: > On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 05:02:04PM -0500, Taylor, Grant wrote: > > > iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -p tcp -d $HostX --dport $PortY \ > > > -j DNAT --to-destination $LocalHost:$PortY > > > > Slight typo > > > > iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -p tcp -d $HostX --dport $PortX -j DNAT > > --to-destination $LocalHost:$PortY > > whoops. nice catch. iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -p udp -d 192.168.13.43 --dport 161 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 32789 Makes no difference to the traffic I sent out on port 161 to host 192.168.14.43, any ideas on what I could be missing out? I'm using iptables version 1.2.8 if that makes a difference.... -- http://tinyurl.com/7xyt2
