On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 07:08:10PM +0100, Kristof Provost wrote: > On 8 Jan 2017, at 15:55, Marek Zarychta wrote: > The problem description doesn’t ring any bells with me, but I’m also > not sure > I’ve fully understood it. Can you document a minimal reproduction > scenario, > with a pf.conf and perhaps network captures documenting the problem? > > There’s certainly not been a conscious decision to break UDP reply-to. >
Let me apologize, the problem wasn't previously properly identified. It seems to be more problem of UDP protocol implementation than PF issue. UDP sockets are opened and bound to address of the outgoing interface (interface which has a route to the client). Because the socket is not bound to the incoming interface, the PF reply-to rules couldn't be evaluated. By the way, TCP sockets are bound to the interface where the traffic arrives and everything works fine. This machine is i386 running 11.0-STABLE r311772 The problem remains unresolved. Are there any corresponding sysctls correcting this behavior and enabling the opportunity to use PF assisted symmetric routing scenario again? -- Marek Zarychta
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
