Stupid question, but if you are going to forward all the ports, why not
just put it on the other side of your linux box?
ISP--------- Linux box
| -------other box
Is that what you are ruling out when you say the existing nat has to
stay in place? Whats the reasoning behind it? (Just curious)
Joey Kelly wrote:
>I have a the following scenario, and don't know exactly how to make it work:
>
>My client has 5 or so IP addresses from their provider. I have a Linux box
>sitting on one of the IPs, and I'm doing NAT for the office LAN behind it. I
>also have a server that I need to open up completely to the net, such that
>all traffic to a certain IP gets forwarded to the server (I know, I know, but
>humor me). The existing NAT has to stay in place.
>
>I'm using iptables to do the NAT. I suppose that can also forward all ports
>for the second IP to the internal server, or perhaps a utility like rinetd
>could do it. Either way, I know that I have to place the second public IP on
>my external NIC (this part I can do).
>
>So... what do I do next?
>
>Thanks.
>
>
___________________
Nolug mailing list
nolug@nolug.org
Received on 08/06/04
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 12/19/08 EST