iptables question, ports over 1024

[Madison Kelly]

Robert Brockway wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, Madison Kelly wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hi all,
>>
>>  I have a client trying to get into port 1352 (MyPC, I think) on their
>>(windows) server. I've added a rule to allow inbound connections to 1352 (80
>>was already in the iptables firewall and it works. Is there something I am
>>missing about opening a TCP port over 1024?
> 
> 
> You should not see anything different when opening or SNATting a port 
> over 1024[1].  I do this all the time.
> 
> If you netcat to 1352 on the firewall do you see anything? Netcat will 
> work with either tcp or udp.
> 
> What sort of connection failure are you getting (if any)?
> 
> [1] Traditional *nix makes a distinction for anything over the first 1024 
> ports, which actually means the distinction applies to port over 1023 not 
> 1024.  Using the standard *nix security model a non-root user is not 
> allowed to bind ports over 1023.  This has nothing to do with how iptables 
> reacts to the port however.
> 
> Rob
> 

Hi, thanks for the feedback.

   I am new to 'nc' so I hope I did this right. When I scan it with 
'nmap' i get a 'filtered' message.

akane:/home/madison# nc 111.222.33.44 1352
(UNKNOWN) [111.222.33.44] 1352 (lotusnote) : Connection timed out

Thanks!

Madison

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Madison Kelly (Digimer)
TLE-BU, The Linux Experience; Back Up
http://tle-bu.thelinuxexperience.com
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml