|
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Oliver Weichhold wrote:
<snip>
ifconfig eth1:0 192.168.231.10 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast
192.168.231.255 up
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING --dst 192.168.230.33 -p tcp --dport 80 -j
DNAT --to-destination 192.168.231.10
iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp --dst 192.168.231.10 --dport 80 -j
SNAT --to-source 192.168.230.33
iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT --dst 192.168.230.33 -p tcp --dport 80 -j DNAT
--to-destination 192.168.231.10
http://www.austintek.com/LVS/LVS-HOWTO/mini-HOWTO/LVS-mini-HOWTO.html#filter_rules
Is this caused by the
absense of the patch you've mentioned?
can't tell. Did you read the docs for settting up
forward-shared?
Furthermore, I've realized that I'm going to be limited to one gateway for
the forseeable future so I have to NAT anyway.
what's the connection between the number of gateways and the
forwarding method?
Either through ipvs or
through iptables. Does it matter who performs the NAT or am I completely
wrong?
the director does the NAT for you. Read the HOWTO
Joe
--
Joseph Mack NA3T EME(B,D), FM05lw North Carolina
jmack (at) wm7d (dot) net - azimuthal equidistant map
generator at http://www.wm7d.net/azproj.shtml
Homepage http://www.austintek.com/ It's GNU/Linux!
| 