Shachar Shemesh wrote:
>
> Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
> > You know what, it's a border line case. Let's call it a draw ;-)
>
> Actually, I don't believe in draws. Either I need to route all my traffic through
> the linux machine, or I don't. If I do - I don't care whether NAT is being
> employed or not. If I don't, I don't care either.
>
> What I see here is that I need to install on my router a rule that says, more or
> less, "If the packet is destined to go to port 80 of any machine, route it to the
> proxy, otherwise, route it usually". I don't think a regular router can do such a
> thing. I don't even think that CheckPoint's FW-1 can do such a thing. It can do
> exactly what I wanted to begin with (i.e. - change packets so that they all go to
> the proxy machine), but that's a NAT again.
Yes, Firewall-1 supports it (and calls it NAT too! ;-) . See
http://www.phoneboy.com/fw1/faq/0022.html
--
Gilad Ben-Yossef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://kagoor.com | +972(9)9565333 x230 | +972(54)756701
"I've been seduced by the chocolate side of the force."
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
