On 2 August 2015 at 22:00, RD Thrush <openbsd-t...@thrush.com> wrote: > On 08/02/15 13:37, Mike Belopuhov wrote: >> most likely it's triggered by the reply-to statement. you may try the >> attached >> diff to see which rule the state belongs to. since you're using >> anchors, figuring >> out rule numbers will not be easy but you may try to see if one of those give >> you something reasonable: >> >> pfctl -a '*' -vvsr >> pfctl -a 'ext1' -vvsr >> pfctl -a 'ext2' -vvsr > > Thanks, "panic: no appropriate pool for 23/23" is the new result. Since the > main pf has less than 23 rules and only one of the anchors has an active > interface, I assume it's rule 23 from the ext1 anchor. I've attached the > pfctl results from above as well as a short gdb session w/ the crash dump. > > panic: no appropriate pool for 23/23
thanks for testing. rule 23 is a reply-to rule. jonathan, if you don't object, i think we should commit the dif as is at least for the release.
