On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 13:44:14 +0100
"SN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So to answer your question yes you need NAT unless you have public ips
> on those machines inside your network
>
Thanks. That is what I thought, but the info that I was able to locate
seemed to be implying that iptables rules co
e data to box2.
So to answer your question yes you need NAT unless you have public ips on
those machines inside your network
- Original Message -
From: "Ian Truelsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Gentoo-User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 31,
Ian Truelsen wrote:
I have been trying to figure out whether NAT adds any additional
functionality that I could not get with comprehensive iptables rules. In
other words, if I were to specifically forward those ports that I needed
from the firewall to the correct internal machines and then do the s
You need NAT if you have more machines you want to connect to the internet
than PUBLIC ip adresses.
If you have a home config, you probably only have one address. If you want
to connect more than one machine to the internet simultaneously you need
to do NAT. If you don't, traffic coming from m
I have been trying to figure this out with google, but the answer is
still a little less than clear, so I thought I would bother you good
folks.
I have been trying to figure out whether NAT adds any additional
functionality that I could not get with comprehensive iptables rules. In
other words, if
