On 28/11/2015 20:47, Thomás S. Bregolin wrote:
> Besides the redirect_port option, you still need rules allowing traffic
> in to those ports. Excuse-me if you've done that already (I have no way
> of knowing).
>
>
> Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 03:19:09PM +1100, Graham Menhennitt:
>> On 28/11/2015 05:03, T
Nathan, I've gone the same way that you have, ie bunch of jails that are
individually providing services& kernel Nat. It takes careful planning and
the knowledge that the default route will be the first IP in your jail.conf
list for each jail.
Getting jails to play nice means fiddling around with
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 15:19:09 +1100, Graham Menhennitt wrote:
> On 28/11/2015 05:03, Thomas wrote:
> > Aren't your regular NAT rules in NAT instance 1? That command will
> > overwrite those and leave just the new ones.
> >
> > If that's the case, you can put those rules in a different NAT insta
On 27/11/2015 12:55 PM, Nathan Aherne wrote:
Hi Julian,
Thank you for replying. I was completely off grid for a while and only got back
on it today.
I thought that Vimage was probably the way to achieve what I want. The main
reason I was staying away from Vimage was the reported bugs with it,
Hello,
Besides the redirect_port option, you still need rules allowing traffic
in to those ports. Excuse-me if you've done that already (I have no way
of knowing).
I'd suggest forwarding one or all of those ports to another host, and
testing with netcat in order to rule out problems with the PS4
