| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
saffy
n00b
Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 14
Location: London, UK
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2004 6:35 pm Post subject: Is this iptables command valid?? |
 |
|
I am trying to add an additional command to the firewall created by shorewall, but it chokes on the following:-
| Code: | | iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i eth1 -p udp -d 172.23.51.211 -m udp --destination-port 5100 -m state --state NEW -m nth --every 10 --packet 0 -m limit --limit 1/second --limit-burst 1 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 51000 |
Are there any iptables experts out there who know why I get an "No chain/target/match by that name" error??
The idea is to have 10 of these rules with different packet numbers and redirect ports.
_________________
===============================>
saffy |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Janne Pikkarainen
Veteran
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 1143
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2004 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Your kernel is probably missing some of those modules which are being loaded with the -m switch. Other than that the rule looks like ok.
_________________
Yes, I'm the man. Now it's your turn to decide if I meant "Yes, I'm the male." or "Yes, I am the Unix Manual Page.". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
saffy
n00b
Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 14
Location: London, UK
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2004 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You are so right! thank you.
My kernel was missing the nth module. Problem solved
_________________
===============================>
saffy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Janne Pikkarainen
Veteran
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 1143
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2004 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Great. 
_________________
Yes, I'm the man. Now it's your turn to decide if I meant "Yes, I'm the male." or "Yes, I am the Unix Manual Page.". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Networking & Security
