iptables on DLink DSL-502T Modem/Router
pgudge at gmail.com
Tue Nov 8 21:39:52 CET 2005
Thanks for the reply, that would explain a few things. I did try the
rule in both INPUT and FORWARD chains, but neither worked, I took a
guess that it would be INPUT to use so I posted with that chain.
Order, when I do a iptables -L -n I can see my rule, but it is always
at the bottom of the pile, so this might be the whole issue. How do I
know what <ruleid> the other rules are so I can add above them?
I have read the -A param is "to add a rule at the end of the chain"
how do I add at the begining of the chain?
On 11/8/05, /dev/rob0 <rob0 at gmx.co.uk> wrote:
> On Monday 2005-November-07 19:47, Paul Goodyear wrote:
> > Does iptables version v1.2.6a support forwarding from a source IP?
> I cannot parse this. Please rephrase (although I think I've answered
> your question below.)
> > The reason I ask, is I have a DLink DSL-502T modem router, the router
> > has linux on and running iptables.
> General note about embedded devices: you're limited to the netfilter
> drivers that the developer saw fit to include. My Linksys w/Sveasoft
> firmware lacks some of the more recent and better toys. (I'm planning
> to upgrade to OpenWRT.)
> > The webadmin for the router does not allow you to create ip filters,
> > port forwarding is there but not filtering.
> But apparently you can get to a shell?
> > I want to allow access to port 3389 from only 1 internet IP address.
> > Should this work? (184.108.40.206 being an example)
> > iptables -A INPUT -s 220.127.116.11 -d 192.168.1.2 -p tcp --dport 3389
> > -j ACCEPT
> Without seeing your rules I can only guess. I have 3 guesses, in the
> order they appear on the command line:
> 1. "-A" : order matters. If an earlier rule does something else with
> your MS-RDP traffic from 18.104.22.168 destined to 192.168.1.2, this is
> never hit.
> 2. "INPUT" : If 192.168.1.2 is not a local IP on the router, this rule
> can never be hit. Try "FORWARD".
> 3. "-d 192.168.1.2" : That's a non-routable RFC 1918 address. You have
> to perform DNAT in the nat table prior to this. You implied that this
> has been done, but you were not explicit.
> Given the topology you described (the rules being on a DSL router) I
> would guess number 2 is your problem. Embedded devices are not likely
> to be running RDP servers.
> mail to this address is discarded unless "/dev/rob0"
> or "not-spam" is in Subject: header
More information about the netfilter