On Friday 29 Mar 2013 20:36:40 Pandu Poluan wrote: > On Mar 30, 2013 2:54 AM, "Mick" <michaelkintz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > A few months ago I got some errors about the match option in some > > iptables rules that I was running at the time. I modified these to > > remove match > > and > > > add conntrack and all went well. > > > > > > Now I am trying to run this: > > > > /sbin/iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -v -p tcp --dport 1935 -j REDIRECT > > > > but it fails to load and it does not give me any particularly informative > > message: > > > > # /sbin/iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -v -p tcp --dport 1935 -j REDIRECT > > REDIRECT tcp opt -- in * out * 0.0.0.0/0 -> 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:1935 > > > > # /sbin/iptables -L -v -n | grep 1935 > > # > > > > Any idea how I should rewrite this rule? I was using it to redirect the > > output to rtmpsrv to capture the address of a rtmpe stream, but now it > > does not work. > > -- > > Regards, > > Mick > > IIRC, iptables -L by default only dumps the "filter" table. > > Just use iptables-save and pipe the result through less (more info there; > you can ensure that the rule gets inserted to the proper table and chain).
Hmm... the rule is saved, but searching for the port number does not bring up anything, hence I assumed that it is not accepted. Isn't a port number in this case '1935' interpreted as a search string on the shell? Quotes don't work. -- Regards, Mick
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
