|
||||||||||
Lee Sharp wrote: > From: "Steve Johnson" <sjohnson at warpdriveonline dot com> >> Steve Johnson wrote: > >>> Lee Sharp wrote: > >>>> Is your m0n0wall web interface http or https? If http, it could be >>>> the antilockout rule. Try changing m0n0wall to https and see if it >>>> works. > >>> Good idea, but no, that wasn't it. I switched webGUI protocol to >>> https and rebooted the firewall. I still get a connection timeout >>> from the accessing browser, and no record of the access attempt in >>> the log. > >> I checked with the ISP and found out that they block port 25, but >> nothing else. So now I'm really stumped as to why I'm not seeing http >> access attempts in the firewall log. > > To get in you need both a inbound NAT rule, and a firewall rule. An > easy check is to flip back to http for m0n0wall and turn off the > inbound NAT. If you get the m0n0wall page, you have the firewall rule > OK. If not, you need to open up the firewall more. If you do get it, > look at your inbound NAT rule. > > Lee [ Problem summary: I can't access http server in the DMZ from WAN interface. From the LAN interface, it's fine. ] I set the webGUI back to http and deleted the NAT rule. When I browse the WAN IP address from outside, I get the same result -- a connection timeout at the browser and no indication of an access attempt in the log. I then rewrote the one WAN rule to pass all traffic inbound to any http port on any interface. Still nothing and still no log entries. Out of curiosity, I tried hitting the IP address on a variety of ports and protocols: ping, ssh, telnet, ftp and telnet to port 80. All were blocked, but at least the ping, ssh and telnet showed up in the log as blocked packets. http and ftp simply vanished: Block 19:59:36.901484 WAN 216.17.nnn.nnn, port 48549 24.56.nnn.nn, port 22 TCP Block 19:59:11.361441 WAN 216.17.nnn.nnn, port 8089 24.56.nnn.nn, port 23 TCP Block 19:50:36.096978 WAN 216.17.nnn.nnn 24.56.nnn.nn, type echo/0 ICMP More and more I'm thinking this is an ISP issue. They confirmed today that they routinely block SMTP port 25. I think they're blocking other ports as well. I will check and really make them work to confirm it. Does anyone else have another suggestion as to what might be happening? Thanks, Steve |