Mailing List ArchiveSupport open source code!
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: firewalling behind NAT?
- To: tlug@example.com
- Subject: Re: firewalling behind NAT?
- From: Jonathan Q <jq@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 02:22:25 +0900
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- In-Reply-To: <21DEAE09F017D111969700A0C98407520572A4FB@example.com>; from SStone@example.com on Tue, May 22, 2001 at 10:16:06AM -0700
- References: <21DEAE09F017D111969700A0C98407520572A4FB@example.com>
- Reply-To: tlug@example.com
- Resent-From: tlug@example.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <psoxcC.A.9qH.8CqC7@example.com>
- Resent-Sender: tlug-request@example.com
Scott Stone (SStone@example.com) wrote: > I think Netmeeting uses either the old or new Directplay format for message > passing. If you forward the right ports to the intended machine, it should > work: > > OLD DIRECTPLAY: tcp and udp 47624, tcp and udp 2300-2400 inclusive. > NEW DIRECTPLAY: 9110/udp only Not on a Sumitomo DSL router :-p It partially works, but not entirely. It works better on the latest ones than on the earlier ones, but is still officially held to be unsupported. Works fine on Cisco. Probably works fine if you're running a DSL modem and using a Linux box for NATting, too (neat little jig to keep this on-topic, huh? :-) Jonathan
- References:
- RE: firewalling behind NAT?
- From: Scott Stone <SStone@example.com>
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: RE: How can I recover my superblock?
- Next by Date: RE: firewalling behind NAT?
- Prev by thread: RE: firewalling behind NAT?
- Next by thread: RE: firewalling behind NAT?
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links