Ok, the obvious part that I think I was missing while it was late, was
that these must be keep-alive packets generated by the firewall as the
dynamic rules are about to expire. That being the case however,
shouldn't these keep-alive packets take the same action as the original
rule (skipto
On Saturday 02 December 2006 19:00, James Halstead wrote:
Ok, the obvious part that I think I was missing while it was late,
was that these must be keep-alive packets generated by the firewall as
the dynamic rules are about to expire. That being the case however,
shouldn't these keep-alive
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 09:00:13PM +0100, Max Laier wrote:
On Saturday 02 December 2006 19:00, James Halstead wrote:
Ok, the obvious part that I think I was missing while it was late,
was that these must be keep-alive packets generated by the firewall as
the dynamic rules are about to
Luigi Rizzo wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 09:00:13PM +0100, Max Laier wrote:
On Saturday 02 December 2006 19:00, James Halstead wrote:
Ok, the obvious part that I think I was missing while it was late,
was that these must be keep-alive packets generated by the firewall as
the dynamic rules
Ok, this has been driving me nuts for a while. I recently noticed that
my 5.4-RELEASE firewall was having a problem with packet leakage. I am
seeing the occasional packet on the outside interface with an internal
src ip. I put a hub between my firewall and cable modem and verified
that the
