On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Eugene Yunak wrote:
>On 31 March 2010 19:27, N. Arley Dealey <arley.dea...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> It would appear to me that antispoof and URPF achieve similar results. Is
>> there a reason to prefer one over the other?
>
>Not at all. antispoof blocks ip packets that came in from the wrong
>interface, while URPF blocks packets from "aliens" (no entry in
>routing table for the source address). Just look at the output of
>pfctl -sr
If I'm reading the documentation for URPF correctly, that's not true --
URPF blocks packets which arrive on an interface which is not pointed to
by a route to the packet's source address, which is somewhat similar to
what antispoof does.
Dave
--
Dave Anderson
<d...@daveanderson.com>
