On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Aton wrote:

> >1:
> >
> >   ipmasqadm portfw -a -P tcp -L (local addr) 80 -R (masq'd addr) 80
> >
> >   seems to set up the forward I want.  What I read in the docs 
> >   indicates that the return ports should already be covered by
> >   the normal masq behavior.  Is this true, or do I need to set up
> >   a return path?
> 
> That should work fine, but I would HIGHLY recommend moving a 2.4 based
> kernel and use iptables. The functionality is emmensely more powerful.

Yeah, I think the stateful forwarding connections sound nifty.  But I
think I'll get this one little forward working before I confuse myself!<g>

> Its waitng to resolve names. Use ipchains -L -n to output in numerical
> output only. 

Thanks!  Mike H. said the same thing and it must be true since you're both
right!

-- 
"To misattribute a quote is unforgivable." --Anonymous