FW NAT and Keep State
From: Geoff Lane (bunsen_at_talk21.com)
Date: 12/05/03
- Next message: Tim Haynes: "Re: FW NAT and Keep State"
- Previous message: Carsten Keller: "Re: Some services working but can't ping (not ping-able)"
- Next in thread: Tim Haynes: "Re: FW NAT and Keep State"
- Reply: Tim Haynes: "Re: FW NAT and Keep State"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 10:59:51 +0000
Re WiFi set up with three computer access (MAC access enabled).
I know a little about Firewalls in relation to Packet Filtering, I
know enough to confuse myself rather than, like many, live in blissful
ignorance.
I recently installed broadband, as I enjoy a 'fiddle' I bought a
slightly more user definable router than the norm, I got a Vigor 2600.
It uses NAT by default, this shows Stealth on Steve Gibson's site and
I have been told that with NAT there is no real need to have any
inbound protection as NAT takes care of it.
When I used my Linux machine as a server I had 'mangle' enabled (I
think this is NAT) and then there was a rule for any inbound packets
to be associated or related otherwise they would be dropped.
My router has an option on the 'rules' set up to tick 'keep state' and
I am wondering if this is an option only to be used for other
functions such as DMZ or open ports (I am guessing here).
Geoff Lane
- Next message: Tim Haynes: "Re: FW NAT and Keep State"
- Previous message: Carsten Keller: "Re: Some services working but can't ping (not ping-able)"
- Next in thread: Tim Haynes: "Re: FW NAT and Keep State"
- Reply: Tim Haynes: "Re: FW NAT and Keep State"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|