On Nov 13, 2007 2:30 PM, J65nko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Nov 12, 2007 9:08 PM, Alupului Costin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > I seem to have quite a problem with PF. I have set up a bridge to > > shape my upstream traffic. I use ALTQ with hfsc discipline; but that's > > not really important. My problem comes with the filter rules. I have > > to use keep state because of the speed benefits (really I don't have a > > choice), but PF has a problem when the clients passing traffic through > > the bridge use TCP window scaling. Here is an example of four filter > > rules that I thought should work to pass the traffic from one client > > through the bridge and create a state: > > > > pass in quick on vlan0 from any to anIP/32 > > pass out quick on vlan0 from anIP/32 to any keep state queue ul_client > > pass in quick on vlan1 from anIP/32 to any > > pass out quick on vlan1 from any to anIP/32 keep state queue dl_client > > > > The above rules generate state-mismatches. I thought that would be > > because pf doesn't see the SYN packet, although it does (one of the > > out rules) and should create the state then... I tried writing all the > > rules with keep state (even the inbound ones) but then nothing would > > work at all. My intention was to create if-bound states, but I > > switched back to floating states in the hope that pf would associate > > the state created by an outbound rule with the traffic returning on > > another interface of the bridge; still didn't work. > > > > I have read the man page for if_bridge and set the following sysctl > > variables: > > > > net.link.bridge.pfil_onlyip: 1 > > net.link.bridge.pfil_bridge: 0 > > net.link.bridge.pfil_member: 1 > > > > I have also read some posts on the web that said that pf simply > > doesn't have all the hooks necesary to do the filtering inbound and > > outbound, but reading the pfil man page I seem to disaggree with that. > > > > Has anyone encountered the same problem? And, more important: if i > > give up the bridge setup and switch to routing, would that have any > > effect? I.E: will I then be able to use keep state with the inbound > > rules? > > > > Any help at all would be hugely appreciated as I am trying for about a > > week to sort out this problem and can't seem to get any closer. The > > only solution was to kindly ask my clients using TCP window scaling > > (Vista mostly) to turn off this feature... Now I am seriously > > considering bumping my bridge to a router but I am not sure that the > > problem will be solved then. > > > > Oh, here is the setup of the bridge from rc.conf, although there > > shouldn't be any problems there (the bridge works fine without pf, or > > with pf stateless): > > > > # > > # Core: em2 -> vlan1 > > # Border: em1 -> vlan0 > > # Bridge0 vlan0 -><- vlan1 > > # > > cloned_interfaces="bridge0 vlan0 vlan1" > > ifconfig_em0="up" > > ifconfig_em1="up" > > ifconfig_em2="up" > > ifconfig_vlan0="vlan 132 vlandev em1 up" > > ifconfig_vlan1="vlan 132 vlandev em2 up" > > ifconfig_bridge0="addm vlan0 addm vlan1 up" > > # Admin iface > > ifconfig_em0="inet adminIP netmask 255.255.255.0" > > > > See "Create TCP states on the initial SYN packet" from > http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20060928081238 > > That paragraph explains nicely the necessity of pf to create state on > the first packet of the 3-way TCP handshake to prevent TCP window > scaling issues.
I aggree with you. My problem is why doesn't pf establish the connection correctly with the first outbound rule (the SYN packet passes that rule). Furthermore: why everything stalls if I use keep state on the inbound rules also? Because that would make the most sense: using keep state with every rule... In a routing environment it all works fine, but not with the bridge. So I guess that the problem could be the bridge, although everything else works fine besides "keep state" on inbound rules... Costin > > =Adriaan= > > _______________________________________________ > firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > _______________________________________________ email@example.com mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"