On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 5:42 PM, Andreas Nilsson andrn...@gmail.com wrote:
... snip ...
I'm wondering what's happening on the outbound path, most of your rules
handle inbound (to kernel) and it seems that rule 65535 deals with most
outbound, except those specifically acting on both paths.
... snip ...
I'm wondering what's happening on the outbound path, most of your rules
handle inbound (to kernel) and it seems that rule 65535 deals with most
outbound, except those specifically acting on both paths.
So do I :)
Maybe try adding to the above:
ipfw add 63510 count log ip
... snip ...
Ah. Well it was good to see the rules listed anyway, always helps.
Was the count rules something like:
1 901 46132 skipto 63000 ip from table(1) to any in recv
table(8)
... same as before ...
63500 895 45844 count log logamount 100 ip
Hello, Andreas.
If table(12) is empty, how will fwd know where to send the packets that
hits it?
Best regards,
Raimundo
On 4 March 2014 02:58, Andreas Nilsson andrn...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I'm having a strange problem with ipfw and/or routing. I've only tested
this on 9.2-RELEASE-p3,
Hello Raimundo
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Raimundo Santos rait...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello, Andreas.
If table(12) is empty, how will fwd know where to send the packets that
hits it?
My understanding is that the rule should not be triggered, as the ... from
table(12) will not match any
On 04.03.2014 09:58, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
Why do I need the explict fwd rule? As far as I can see the ipfw man page
says nothing about skipto changing the packets, and since the 65533 rule in
the second ruleset triggers on the same thing as the skipto rule it would
seem like packets are
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Andrey V. Elsukov bu7c...@yandex.ru wrote:
On 04.03.2014 09:58, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
Why do I need the explict fwd rule? As far as I can see the ipfw man page
says nothing about skipto changing the packets, and since the 65533 rule
in
the second ruleset
On 05.03.2014 23:44, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
With the above ruleset a packet
1) triggering the first rule ( ie skipto no-op and the allow from any to
any ) is lost.
2) triggering the second rule (ie skipto divert rule which returns it to
the stack ) is forwarded.
So, I don't see in the code
On Wed, 5 Mar 2014 20:44:51 +0100, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Andrey V. Elsukov bu7c...@yandex.ru wrote:
On 04.03.2014 09:58, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
Why do I need the explict fwd rule? As far as I can see the ipfw man page
says nothing about skipto
Hello,
I'm having a strange problem with ipfw and/or routing. I've only tested
this on 9.2-RELEASE-p3, amd64. The machine is sort of acting as router. The
ruleset is like (ipfw defaults to accept):
$cmd=ipfw -fq
$cmd add 1 skipto 65534 log all from table(1) to any in recv table(8)
...
$cmd
10 matches
Mail list logo
