Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 10:03:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 10:03:20 -0500 Received: from wep10a-3.wep.tudelft.nl ([130.161.65.38]:63755 "EHLO wep10a-3.wep.tudelft.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 10:03:05 -0500 Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 15:32:36 +0100 (CET) From: Taco IJsselmuiden Reply-To: Taco IJsselmuiden To: Martin Josefsson cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: ip_nat_ftp and different ports In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > I'm running 1.1.2 right now, actually, which should have the 'ftp-multi > > patch for non-standard ftp servers'... > > Well have you applied the ftp-multi patch? (this is a patch so that the > ftp-module takes a ports parameter, the thing you probably are talking > about is a bug which I and several others found in the ftp-module, these > two things have nothing with each other to do.) Well, after having no time for a coule of days, back to business ;)) I've downloaded + applied the ftp-multi patch and recompiled the modules. then loaded them with ports=21,41,42,62,63, which works (well, no errors/warnings...). Then trying the application for which i needed it: doesn't work ;(( Are there maybe some major/crucial differences between the 2.2.x version (which works) of ip_masq_ftp and the 2.4.x version of ip_nat_ftp ?? Cheers, Taco. --- "I was only 75 years old when I met her and I was still a kid...." -- Duncan McLeod - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/