Feature #1933
closed
Outbound NAT might be feasible but for port forwards this could be problematic as the group rules wouldn't get reply-to so the end result wouldn't be what the user expects.
You would have to split the user rule(s) with respective reply-to.
- Target version set to 2.4.4
- Status changed from New to Feedback
- % Done changed from 0 to 100
On 2.4.4.a.20180810.1552, was able to create an Interface Group, then a NAT Port Forward using the newly created Interface Group (associated rule was also created on the Interface Group at Firewall > Rules). A Outbound NAT mapping using the Interface Group was also successfully created.
- Status changed from Feedback to Resolved
Also available in: Atom
PDF