China DOS Union

First of all, let me say “sorry” to all the moderators of this section. This question really wasn’t supposed to be posted here, but if I posted it in the WINDOWS section, I guess nobody would even look at it and no one would answer it. It’s better here. If the problem gets solved, please have a moderator delete this post. Thanks.......

Here’s the situation. Recently I’ve been setting up and debugging the company’s hardware firewall. I won’t say what brand it is. Anyway, most firewalls are pretty much the same. I want to use the firewall’s DMZ port to set up a WEB server. I’ve tried many times without success. The firewall’s DMZ zone works in “transparent mode,” which means that if the DMZ is connected to the WEB server, the server’s IP address is set to a public IP. Then after some basic settings on the firewall, for example, DMZ to outside, outside to DMZ, DMZ to inside, inside to DMZ, all of these are set correctly, so basically there shouldn’t be any problem. But when I test it, I still can’t open the site on my WEB server. The ISP gave me 4 public IPs, and none of them worked in my tests. But if I use the firewall’s NAT address forwarding mode, I can access the server—that is, not using the DMZ port, and putting the server on the internal network—then there is no problem. But now the boss wants the server connected to the DMZ port for use, and I’m really dizzy over this. I’ve tried it over and over without success. I’d appreciate it if any experts could give me some pointers.............

[ Last edited by willsort on 2006-5-24 at 00:56 ]

“屡试不爽” isn’t used that way. Hehe.

There’s one thing about your question that I don’t quite understand: why set the IP address of the DMZ host on the internal network to a public IP? I think it should be set to an internal IP, and then you tell the router that this IP is the DMZ host.

Reply #3, hello. At first I thought the same thing too—why set the machine to a public IP? It’s because our firewall’s DMZ is set to “transparent mode.” I won’t say much more about what transparent mode is; you should understand. This confused me from the start too. But I asked the firewall vendor’s tech support, and the technician said this setup is correct, and the help file explains it this way too........

I’ve never used any transparent mode. If it’s set to a public IP (literally it already sounds like it’s outside), then why is there still a need for something like "DMZ to outside"?
"Connected to the DMZ port"? Is it only a software setting, or is there actually a physical cable connection too?

The poster above, maybe you didn’t read the question carefully. I said “hardware firewall,” not “software firewall.” The nature of the two is completely different. It has nothing to do with software....................

As for the problem that the public network can’t access it, as long as you set the DMZ host, then open the http80 port in the local firewall and that’s enough

I’ll make it short. It seems the poster above still didn’t understand what I meant. The server is running a whole series of services like ＦＴＰ　ＤＮＳ　ＨＴＴＰ　ＨＴＴＰＳ. So what else do you think is missing? Now please look carefully at the problem. Let me explain it again＝＝＞＂I want to set up my company’s public network server through the ＤＭＺ method. Right now the test is unsuccessful. All other settings are correct. The server IP address is set to a public ＩＰ. I don’t know where the problem is???＂

─────────────────　Moderator Notice　─────────────────
For the convenience of forum users browsing and moderator management, please modify the title of this topic so that it briefly describes the content or purpose of the topic
If you believe the title does not need to be changed, please continue replying in this thread to make your case; if the reason is sufficient, this notice will be canceled
If you confirm that the title needs to be changed, please click the "Edit" button below the first post of this thread, and modify the title field on the edit page
If three days after this notice is issued you still have not appealed or modified it, the moderator will modify it and apply the corresponding penalty to the author
The penalty is a deduction of 8 credits, including taking back the 6 points you were rewarded for posting the topic and a punitive deduction of 2 points for the title violation
After learning that you have made a positive and appropriate response, the moderator will delete this notice within three working days to remove its adverse effect on you
─────────────────　Moderator Notice　─────────────────


Re bagpipe:

Although your question is posted here and does not match the section topic, according to my ideas for revising the forum, I do not care very much about that. What I do care about is that your subject title used the word “serious” and seven exclamation marks, yet did not say a single word about what your problem actually is. That is not a good way to ask a question.

─────────────────　Moderation Record　─────────────────
Executed by: Will Sort
Action: Modified title - 20605 - Serious request for support and answers！！！！！！！
Explanation: Three days after the notice was issued, the original topic author still had not appealed or modified it, so it was modified by a moderator and penalized
Penalty: Deducted the ６ credits rewarded for posting this topic, and deducted a punitive ２ credits for the title violation
─────────────────　Moderation Record　─────────────────



─────────────────　Moderation Record　─────────────────
Executed by: Will Sort
Action: Moved topic: from 《DOS Q&A & Problem Discussion (Answer Room)》
Explanation: No reply in the original section within three days, moved to this section to try
Notice: The redirect link in the original section will be deleted after three days
─────────────────　Moderation Record　─────────────────