Conveying NAT firewall port re-writing to mosh #494
Comments
earlchew
added a commit
to earlchew/mosh
that referenced
this issue
Feb 4, 2014
mobile-shell#494 Some firewalls re-write port numbers. Allow a port translation rule to be specified. When the mosh-server responds with a port, have the mosh-client connect to the translated external firewall port. Signed-off-by: Earl Chew <[email protected]>
This was referenced Feb 4, 2014
|
Duplicates #497. |
earlchew
added a commit
to earlchew/mosh
that referenced
this issue
Dec 10, 2017
mobile-shell#494 Some firewalls re-write port numbers. Allow a port translation rule to be specified. When the mosh-server responds with a port, have the mosh-client connect to the translated external firewall port. Signed-off-by: Earl Chew <[email protected]>
earlchew
added a commit
to earlchew/mosh
that referenced
this issue
Dec 10, 2017
mobile-shell#494 Some firewalls re-write port numbers. Allow a port translation rule to be specified. When the mosh-server responds with a port, have the mosh-client connect to the translated external firewall port. Signed-off-by: Earl Chew <[email protected]>
earlchew
added a commit
to earlchew/mosh
that referenced
this issue
Apr 5, 2018
mobile-shell#494 Some firewalls re-write port numbers. Allow a port translation rule to be specified. When the mosh-server responds with a port, have the mosh-client connect to the translated external firewall port. Signed-off-by: Earl Chew <[email protected]>
earlchew
added a commit
to earlchew/mosh
that referenced
this issue
Apr 7, 2018
mobile-shell#494 Some firewalls re-write port numbers. Allow a port translation rule to be specified. When the mosh-server responds with a port, have the mosh-client connect to the translated external firewall port. Signed-off-by: Earl Chew <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I am using a firewall which re-writes TCP/UDP port numbers.
I'm considering a patch to bin/mosh to accommodate this, and I'm soliciting advice on a reasonable approach.
Suppose the firewall will rewrite port numbers from 40001 to 50001 (as an example). This means that I want to issue -p 50001 to instruct the server to listen on 50001, but I also want the client to send to port 40001 (which the firewall will rewrite).
I'm thinking:
would be a reasonable way to indicate this.
The second example shows how it could be combined with a server side port range. Suppose the server responded with port 50055, the client would use:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: