[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  Chris Buechler <cbuechler at gmail dot com>
 Cc:  m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall-dev] Server NAT really needed?
 Date:  Wed, 27 Apr 2005 12:39:59 -0400
On 4/27/05, Peter Allgeyer <allgeyer at web dot de> wrote:
> Hi!
> I didn't know anything about the term "Server NAT", so I attempted to
> become out what this means and what's it relationship to "1:1 NAT". Now
> I know, that it means nothing else than doing port forwarding to an
> additional WAN IP-address. I found it somewhat confusing!
> So what I want to know is, why there's an extra page for it instead of
> integrating this into the "inbound NAT" page? Why not just choosing the
> interface and typing the IP address in another field (or leaving the
> field blank for choosing the main interface address)? Is there a deeper
> sense for an additional "Server NAT" tab?

Because the IP's you add in the Server NAT tab are then made available
in the Inbound NAT rules drop down box.  You could do it all in the
Inbound NAT tab by replacing the drop down box with a text box, but
I'd say that greatly increases your chances of mistakes there.  There
also might be a reason on the back end that it's done that way.