Prev: 871W: Wi-fi to Wi-fi unreliable
Next: I am looking to buy the below Cisco models.I also buy networking and telecom equipment from Nortel, Brocade, Juniper, Extreme, Foundry, IBM, HP, Companq and more.
From: Rob on 8 Aug 2010 13:31
Tom <tdenham735(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm beginning to think this syntax is not correct:
>
> ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.1.103 80 interface
> FastEthernet1
> 80 extendable
>
> Any other suggestions ?

I think it should be "overload" instead of "extendable".
From: Tom on 8 Aug 2010 14:39
On Aug 8, 1:31 pm, Rob <nom...(a)example.com> wrote:
> Tom <tdenham...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm beginning to think this syntax is not correct:
>
> > ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.1.103 80 interface
> > FastEthernet1
> > 80 extendable
>
> > Any other suggestions ?
>
> I think it should be "overload" instead of "extendable".

Nope...will not take any args after the port number. The help "?"
shows <cr> as the last option in this case.

Is very odd, because seems should be such a simple thing to do.
From: Rob on 8 Aug 2010 15:14
Tom <tdenham735(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 8, 1:31 pm, Rob <nom...(a)example.com> wrote:
>> Tom <tdenham...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I'm beginning to think this syntax is not correct:
>>
>> > ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.1.103 80 interface
>> > FastEthernet1
>> > 80 extendable
>>
>> > Any other suggestions ?
>>
>> I think it should be "overload" instead of "extendable".
>
> Nope...will not take any args after the port number. The help "?"
> shows <cr> as the last option in this case.
>
> Is very odd, because seems should be such a simple thing to do.

And it does not work?
From: Tom on 8 Aug 2010 15:51
On Aug 8, 3:14 pm, Rob <nom...(a)example.com> wrote:
> Tom <tdenham...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Aug 8, 1:31 pm, Rob <nom...(a)example.com> wrote:
> >> Tom <tdenham...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > I'm beginning to think this syntax is not correct:
>
> >> > ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.1.103 80 interface
> >> > FastEthernet1
> >> > 80 extendable
>
> >> > Any other suggestions ?
>
> >> I think it should be "overload" instead of "extendable".
>
> > Nope...will not take any args after the port number.  The help "?"
> > shows <cr> as the last option in this case.
>
> > Is very odd, because seems should be such a simple thing to do.
>
> And it does not work?

Nope...does not work. So will take the command without the last arg,
but just does not work.
I can enter the command with the extendable arg if I use the external
IP address vs the interface, however that won't work because my
external (public) IP is assigned via DHCP.

Seems so close, but so far:(
From: Tom on 8 Aug 2010 15:59
On Aug 8, 3:14 pm, Rob <nom...(a)example.com> wrote:
> Tom <tdenham...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Aug 8, 1:31 pm, Rob <nom...(a)example.com> wrote:
> >> Tom <tdenham...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > I'm beginning to think this syntax is not correct:
>
> >> > ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.1.103 80 interface
> >> > FastEthernet1
> >> > 80 extendable
>
> >> > Any other suggestions ?
>
> >> I think it should be "overload" instead of "extendable".
>
> > Nope...will not take any args after the port number.  The help "?"
> > shows <cr> as the last option in this case.
>
> > Is very odd, because seems should be such a simple thing to do.
>
> And it does not work?

This works:

ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.1.103 22 68.204.221.132 22
extendable

But obviously that won't do because the IP will change. Using DDNS to
always get to my internal IP.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: 871W: Wi-fi to Wi-fi unreliable
Next: I am looking to buy the below Cisco models.I also buy networking and telecom equipment from Nortel, Brocade, Juniper, Extreme, Foundry, IBM, HP, Companq and more.