Hello,
I have removed all references of OpenBSD Packet Filter from my
kernel and have just completed my first (excluding some experimentation
back a decade ago) configuration of ipfw2. At the moment, FreeBSD
-current is building world and the applicable /etc/rc.conf entries
are like
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Darrel levi...@iglou.com wrote:
Can someone please send an exmaple of how to properly use tables?
Quick, trivial example - this doesn't help you understand tableargs,
this is just efficiently to handle a very large list of sparse nets.
I am trying to have both
natd (divert) and loadsharing (pipe/queue)
in the same IPFW2 firewall script.
It works partly. That is, something is wrong because,
pipe-bandwidth does not at all match the measured
and
by using the log-facility I found that
the following package enter the script
Hey all,
I've written a short IPFW ruleset, with only some count rules and one
allow all ip rule. I've got the following entries in my /etc/rc.conf
file:
# IPFW Settings
# Only used for traffic accounting!
firewall_enable=YES
firewall_script=/etc/ipfw.sh
Every time this system boots, it
On 3/10/06, Vladimir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FreeBSD 5.4
Specifically, I can't figure out why rule 3800 is ignored... :confused:
ipfw не такой злобный, чтобы брать и игнорить правила :)
Попробуй добавить правило count сразу до или после
игнорируемого правила. Скорей всего таких пакетов
FreeBSD 5.4
Specifically, I can't figure out why rule 3800 is ignored... :confused:
If you have idea - just give clue abt it Thanks...
Regular NAT is working properly, but I can't configure NAPT to services on
server in LAN
Interface to LAN is also untrusted -that's why so many
I want to deny access to addresses in this range:
84.57.113.0 - 84.61.96.255
What is the best way to specify this range for ipfw2? There must be a
better way than listing a whole bunch of individual networks.
Thanks,
Drew
--
Visit The Alchemist's Warehouse
Magic Tricks, DVDs, Videos
Drew Tomlinson wrote:
I want to deny access to addresses in this range:
84.57.113.0 - 84.61.96.255
What is the best way to specify this range for ipfw2? There must be a
better way than listing a whole bunch of individual networks.
deny ip from 84.56.0.0/13 to any
...comes pretty close
On 2/8/2006 3:11 PM Chuck Swiger wrote:
Drew Tomlinson wrote:
I want to deny access to addresses in this range:
84.57.113.0 - 84.61.96.255
What is the best way to specify this range for ipfw2? There must be a
better way than listing a whole bunch of individual networks.
deny ip
In the last episode (Feb 08), Drew Tomlinson said:
On 2/8/2006 3:11 PM Chuck Swiger wrote:
Drew Tomlinson wrote:
I want to deny access to addresses in this range:
84.57.113.0 - 84.61.96.255
What is the best way to specify this range for ipfw2? There must
be a better way than listing
Hello,
I have searched the lists for information pertaining to this problem,
but I haven't been able to find anything relevant to my attempted usage
of IPFWs forward action. If there are any preexisting threads that
address my concern, please direct me to them.
I have also sent this message
This should get you most of the way there or at least give you a good
idea of what's required.
options IPFIREWALL_FORWARD_EXTENDED
I'm pretty sure this will be required.
defaultrouter=24.85.92.1
ifconfig_rl0=192.168.1.1
ifconfig_vr0=142.179.109.xxx netmask 255.255.248.0
Dennis Olvany wrote:
This should get you most of the way there or at least give you a good
idea of what's required.
options IPFIREWALL_FORWARD_EXTENDED
I'm pretty sure this will be required.
defaultrouter=24.85.92.1
ifconfig_rl0=192.168.1.1
Andrew Fremantle wrote:
Dennis Olvany wrote:
This should get you most of the way there or at least give you a
good idea of what's required.
options IPFIREWALL_FORWARD_EXTENDED
I'm pretty sure this will be required.
defaultrouter=24.85.92.1
is ipfw2, has run just fine for months
How do I configure ipfw2 for properly forwarding the bittorrent
ports (6881-6889) to the destination machine? Log_in_vain is
active on the firewall machine when bittorrent is active on the
private-ip machine, the firewall's syslog is being cluttered
Kenneth W Cochran wrote:
How do I configure ipfw2 for properly forwarding the bittorrent
ports (6881-6889) to the destination machine? Log_in_vain is
natd(8) -redirect_port
ipfw will just forward the packet where as natd will rewrite
I need some help with ipfw2 on my squid box
I have too many dynamic rules errors for dns
Can I insert a dns static rule into my rules (as below) and how?
allow ip from any to any via lo0
allow ip from any to any via lo1
deny ip from any to 127.0.0.0/8
deny ip from 127.0.0.0/8 to any
check-state
Stec John wrote:
I need some help with ipfw2 on my squid box
I have too many dynamic rules errors for dns
Can I insert a dns static rule into my rules (as below) and how?
[ ... ]
# allow DNS,NTP queries out in the world
add pass udp from any 1024-65535 to any 53,123
add pass udp from any
Stec John wrote:
Hi Chuck, are you suggesting to add these dns rules on top of the existing
rules?
Yes.
Can I use allow instead of pass?
Yes, they mean the same thing:
allow Allow packets that match rule. The search terminates.
Aliases are pass,
: Re: ipfw2 - too many dynamic rules
Stec John wrote:
I need some help with ipfw2 on my squid box
I have too many dynamic rules errors for dns
Can I insert a dns static rule into my rules (as below) and how?
[ ... ]
# allow DNS,NTP queries out in the world
add pass udp from any 1024
On Oct 11, 2005, at 10:06 PM, RdBSD wrote:
Dear all,
Can i deny multiple login with the same username in samba using
ipfw2 ?
Thanks,
RdBSD
IT Staff
I do not believe so. IPFW checks for IP packets, not login
credentials. This is something you would have to do within Samba
Dear all,
Can i deny multiple login with the same username in samba using ipfw2 ?
Thanks,
RdBSD
IT Staff
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail
Hello everybody,
please can anybody help me with ipfw rules?
My machine is acting as firewall/router/www-proxy/ftp-proxy for small LAN.
It does not work as ftp-server.
I set my ipfw2 rules exactly as in section 25.6.5.7 An Example NAT and
Stateful Ruleset Ex.2 from handbook.
Everything works
I have FreeBSD-4.11-STABLE on one of my systems. I did a
buildworld/installworld today - but I still have ipfw and not ipfw2 -
even though the manpage says otherwise.
It's been a while since I updated this system - I looked through the
docs and no mention of this in UPDATING etc.
I see
/installworld today - but I still have ipfw and not ipfw2 -
even though the manpage says otherwise.
It's been a while since I updated this system - I looked through the
docs and no mention of this in UPDATING etc.
I see in the /usr/src/sbin/ipfw directory a define of -DIPFW2.
So before I hack further
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 19:12:19 -0400, in sentex.lists.freebsd.questions
you wrote:
I have FreeBSD-4.11-STABLE on one of my systems. I did a
buildworld/installworld today - but I still have ipfw and not ipfw2 -
even though the manpage says otherwise.
Add
IPFW2=TRUE
in /etc/make.conf
, in sentex.lists.freebsd.questions
you wrote:
I have FreeBSD-4.11-STABLE on one of my systems. I did a
buildworld/installworld today - but I still have ipfw and not ipfw2 -
even though the manpage says otherwise.
Add
IPFW2=TRUE
in /etc/make.conf
and
options IPFW2
On 7/1/05, fbsd_user [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way in 5.4 ipfw2 to reset/delete/clear a stateful rule's records
in the state table?
Never tried this myself, but probably by temporarily lowering
net.inet.ip.fw.dyn_*_lifetime?
--
Dmitry
We live less by imagination than despite
Is there a way in 5.4 ipfw2 to reset/delete/clear a stateful rule's records
in the state table?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
When I do a ipfw delete nnon a incore rule which has keep-state on
it, the rule gets removed ok but it's still in the state table. How can I
delete the targeted rule and flush just that rules state table records with
out blowing away all the other state table records?
Ben wrote:
I'm sorry, I can't send this to the list because my messages to the list
bounce because reverse DNS isn't set up.
No worries, thanks a lot for answering.
This is funny, I just set this up for the first time yesterday except I
set everything up to have no IP addresses so that the
Hi there,
I've been running into some problems with what is supposed to be a
filtering bridge with IPFW, on FreeBSD 5.4-REL0.
IPFW has been compiled into kernel:
options BRIDGE
options IPFIREWALL
options IPFIREWALL_DEFAULT_TO_ACCEPT
options IPDIVERT
Hi List,
I'am trying to match 0x0 (Normal Service)
with ipfw iptos [TOS-Value]
as far as I can see one can only use names
to refer to, as reliabilty, congestion ..
but the tag normal or normal-service does not exist.
background is, that I want to stop nmap from
scanning my radius server.
Hi,
I have upgraded from FreeBSD 4.7 to 4.11-RELEASE via booting from CD 1.
I have IPFW2 options already set in my kernel config file, and in
/etc/make.conf
Next, I recompile the kernel, and install it. Then I went to the
/usr/src/sbin/ipfw dir:-
/usr/src/sbin/ipfw-121 mailto:[EMAIL
file.
Whew!
I don't think it was it was like this in 4.10. Must be a 4.11 thing.
Cheers,
Paul
-Original Message-
From: fbsd_user [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 13 June 2005 7:45 PM
To: Paul Hamilton
Subject: RE: Error compiling ipfw2 on FreeBSD 4.11-RELEASE and 4.11-p10
I
Hi!
I have a very strange problem with our firewall using ipfw2. Below is
my configuration file. The firewall is a briding firewall (em2,em3).
After a few seconds (7-12 seconds) of ICMP pings to a machine behind the
firewall suddenly starts blocking all traffic to that specific host
Greetings...
I recently build world and kernel with ipfw support. Can someone
provide examples on how to use these options (verrevpath, versrcreach
and antispoof). What can they be used for and can't! and how to use
them (proper syntax).
Execuse my poor english! I am knew to FreeBSD and UNIX /
I hope I am sending this post to the right mailing list !!!
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 07:06:58 +0200, abu khaled [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greetings...
I recently build world and kernel with ipfw support. Can someone
provide examples on how to use these options (verrevpath, versrcreach
and
traffic. I am using ipfw2 for diverting traffic.
has anybody experienced this problem; only one side of the traffic
gets diverted and the other side is never touched? if so, has anyone
fixed this problems?
here is my simple ipfw2 rule set:
rp6# ipfw show
00100 8458 2774224 divert 8668 udp from
I have read the man page for ipfw and searched the web looking for examples of
using ipfw2 and the preprocessor option.
Does anybody have any examples?
Could I use the preproc option to create a deep packet inspection program?
Please help!
Thank you.
--
Thomas J. Raef
e-Based Security, Inc
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have read the man page for ipfw and searched the web looking for examples
of using ipfw2 and the preprocessor option.
Does anybody have any examples?
Try somthing like the following in /etc/rc.conf:
#firewall_type='/etc/MY_firewall'
#firewall_flags='-p /usr/bin/cpp
Dear sir,
Now I'm using FreeBSD 5.2.1 release but now I can't compile new kernel with
IPFIREWALL_FORWARD option. Please tell me port forwarding work or not work
on FreeBSD 5.2.1 release. I think maybe IPFIREWALL options already included.
Best regards
Doloonkhuch.A
Doloonkhuch wrote:
Dear sir,
Now I'm using FreeBSD 5.2.1 release but now I can't compile new
kernel with IPFIREWALL_FORWARD option. Please tell me port forwarding
work or not work on FreeBSD 5.2.1 release. I think maybe IPFIREWALL
options
already included.
Best regards
Doloonkhuch.A
There is
Hello.
A box of mine, which acts as firewall/bridge, is experiencing frequent
panics.
As said in the subject line, it's a 4.10-RELEASE-p4 with ipfw2 enabled
in the kernel.
I've run through post mortem kernel analisys and found out that the
crashes are always related to ipfw2; specifically I
Hello,
I have tried and tried and tried to get mac filtering to work with
ipfw2. I have tried the usual sources (Google Groups, google, mailling
list, man pages, etc). Here it goes:
I basically want to allow traffic to come from one mac address. I am
trying to get the following rule to work
On Aug 31, 2004, at 12:07 PM, Steve Quezadas wrote:
I basically want to allow traffic to come from one mac address. I am
trying to get the following rule to work:
ipfw add accept tcp from any to any MAC any 10:20:30:40:50:60
OK, that looks about right.
Yes, ipfw2 is on my freebsd system. This rule
On Tuesday 31 August 2004 18:07, Steve Quezadas wrote:
Hello,
I have tried and tried and tried to get mac filtering to work with
ipfw2. I have tried the usual sources (Google Groups, google, mailling
list, man pages, etc). Here it goes:
I basically want to allow traffic to come from one mac
Hi!
I'm looking into if I should go with ipfw2 or ipfilter, anyone that could
point me to some links or tell me pro's and con's (both feature and
performance wise).
Kind Regards,
Stefan Cars
--
Stefan Cars
Snowfall Communications
http://www.snowfall.se
Tel: +46 (0)18 430 80 50 - Direct: +46 (0
On Mon, Aug 16, 2004 at 06:46:23PM +0200, Stefan Cars wrote:
I'm looking into if I should go with ipfw2 or ipfilter, anyone that could
point me to some links or tell me pro's and con's (both feature and
performance wise).
Unless your running quite a complicated setup or have specific
Hello all,
Was just wondering everyone's opinion on this subject
Got a FreeBSD box ... 2.4 ghz Xeon with 1 gig RAM and two gb nic cards.
This box's job is to do a 1:1 NAT for about 2000 workstations.
In everyone's opinion, is IPNAT and IPFW2 a good solution for this?
Also, will that box
This is a resent message, as noone has bothered to reply (yet).
RESENT MESSAGE TEXT FOLLOWS
___
I'm using FreeBSD 5.2.1 with IPFW2 as a firewall/router on a network. The
firewall itself does not need to be terribly sophisticated -- on the other
hand, it is having some
Matt,
IPFW2 is not compiled into 4.10 by default. At a shell, type man ipfw,
then a single forward slash (to bring up the search tool), then search
for STABLE a couple of times directions are in there
Here it is anyway
USING IPFW2 IN FreeBSD-STABLE
ipfw2 is standard in FreeBSD
I'm using FreeBSD 5.2.1 with IPFW2 as a firewall/router on a network.
I'm seeing some very strange things in the dynamic ruleset. The last 4
entries in the list are the issues. You can see that none of the informatin
in the last 4 dynamic rules makes any sense -- not the #/packets or bytes
On June 28, 2004, Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello freebsd-newbies,
I am still fairly new at the BSD level, migrated from linux. The
question that I have is, is Version 4.10 kernel compiled with IPFW2,
I know the doc's say that CURRENT version has and that it was
implemented in 2002
I've searched high and low, and have read many times that doing mac
address filtering with ipfw is possible.
I'm running 4.9, have recompiled the kernel with 'options ipfw2', and
have recompiled libalias ipfw with ipfw2 support.
I've read through the man pages, and I can't make
On Tuesday 25 May 2004 17:57, Elijah A.Chancey wrote:
I've searched high and low, and have read many times that doing mac
address filtering with ipfw is possible.
I'm running 4.9, have recompiled the kernel with 'options ipfw2', and
have recompiled libalias ipfw with ipfw2 support.
I've
Hi,
I use FreeBSD 4.9-Stable, with IPFW2 compiled in.
I have an ipfw rule as follows:
ipfw allow udp from 11.22.33.44 to any in via rl0
which works fine for my purpose (I faked the IP address for this email).
Next I needed to add MAC-checking on this rule, so to begin with
I tried to add a dummy
fbsd_user wrote:
Using an fresh install of FBSD 5.2 RC2 I am trying to
get stateful rules to function.
For some reason ipfw2 seems to be issuing an ICMP:3.3
packet to my ISP's dns.
[ ... ]
# Internal gateway housekeeping
$cmd 00100 allow all from any to any via lo0 # allow all localhost
$cmd
Using an fresh install of FBSD 5.2 RC2 I am trying to
get stateful rules to function.
For some reason ipfw2 seems to be issuing an ICMP:3.3
packet to my ISP's dns.
Here is my rules file
# Flush out the list before we begin.
/sbin/ipfw -q -f flush
# Set rules command prefix
cmd=ipfw -q add
hi all
i have freebsd 4.8 installed and i use ipfw2 with the rules
#!/bin/sh
fwcmd=/sbin/ipfw
${fwcmd} -f flush
#!/bin/sh
ipfw='/sbin/ipfw'
$ipfw -f flush
$ipfw add divert natd all from any to any via ppp0
$ipfw add allow log all from any to any
my local ethernet card has 192.168.133.7 ip
From man ipfw
---
src and dst: {addr | { addr or ... }} [[not] ports]
addr: [not] {any | me | addr-list | addr-set}
addr-set: addr[/masklen]{list}
list: {num | num-num}[,list]
---
I think that it's right:
ipfw 1000 add permit all from 192.168.1.1/24{3,5,9} to any
but I see follwing:
, at least, not in ipfw2 rulesets it doesn't. Where it does expand
like that is in csh(1), bash(1), zsh(1) and similar shells (but not
sh(1)):
% echo 192.168.1.1/24{3,5,9}
192.168.1.1/243 192.168.1.1/245 192.168.1.1/249
Perhaps the original poster was typing the rules in at the command
Good morning!
I have 4.9-release. I'm interesting ipfw2.
I have builded /usr/src/lib/libalias and /usr/src/sbin/ipfw with
-DIPFW2, kernet with option IPFW2.
From man ipfw
---
src and dst: {addr | { addr or ... }} [[not] ports]
addr: [not] {any | me | addr-list | addr-set}
addr-set: addr
My server, with a public IP address, is running named and sshd. This server is also
running IPFW2.
There is a jail also running, with it's own unique public IP address. I have found
that IPFW2 will filter traffic to/from the jail, no matter if I put the jail's alias
on the ethernet device
Hi,
I have 4.9-RC router on a ADSL access and currently using ipfilter for
statefull filtering+nat that is working well. ipfw2 is configured for a
long time with a pass all policy.
When i try to configure a pipe with queues for traffic shaping
as described in the following message (see URL
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:20:20PM +0200, Artur Pydo wrote:
So, my question is : Is there some incompatabilities between
ipfw2/dummynet and IPFilter or maybe there is a bug somewhere ?
I use ipf for filtering and ipfw2 for dummynet without a problem -
sounds like a problem with the dummynet side
[Redirected to -questions]
On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 08:07:13PM +0200, Uwe Klann wrote:
From the Log file IPFW:-
Sep 22 00:24:13 muc /kernel: ipfw: 3300 Accept TCP 217.10.213.30:4418
217.9.121.209:21 in via fxp0
How can I extend on FreeBSD 4.8 (ipfw2) the log contens to see the tranfered
With ipfw1 on 4.8 I use this:
ipfw add 10 check-state
ipfw add 20 allow tcp from xxx.xxx.xxx.0/24 to any keep-state limit src-addr 10
to provide stateful firewalling, and limit the number of simultaneous
tcp sessions to 10 per client. Seems to work great.
On 4.8 I tried ipfw2
(kernel
Hello,
I am still compiling and using ipfw1 because I can't seem to figure out
how to convert my rules to the ipfw2 lingo...
Here are my rules...
#!/bin/sh
/sbin/ipfw -f flush
/sbin/ipfw add divert natd ip from any to any
/sbin/ipfw add allow all from any to any
Now I hear
Hi,
I'm trying to write some ipfw rules to divert packets from a machine
matching a MAC address to a natd process running on a custom divert
port.
Here are the rules I tries that don't work:
ipfw add 99 divert 8669 mac any 00:E0:18:F1:57:94 via wi0
ipfw add 99 divert 8669 mac 00:E0:18:F1:57:94 any
) but don't work on
FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT(ipfw2).
What i am doing wrong?
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 2003.03.30 20:18:53 +0600, Ilia E. Chipitsine wrote:
how can I aggregate rules ...
ipfw add allow ip from any to 192.168.0.0/16
ipfw add allow ip from any to 10.0.0.0/8
... into the single rule, probably using { .. or .. } syntax?
I read man page, tried few combination, but them don't
Hi!
I remember having difficulty getting this to work when I first got IPFW2,
turns out it wouldn't accept it because there _has_ to be a space between
the { and }.
For example...
ipfw add allow ip from any to { 192.168.0.0/16 or 10.0.0.0/8 }
not
ipfw add allow ip from any to {192.168.0.0/16
Markie said:
snip
ipfw add allow ip from any to { 192.168.0.0/16 or 10.0.0.0/8 }
Why aggregate? Is it more efficient?
--
Joe Sotham
If the only prayer you say in your entire life is Thank You,
that will suffice.
- Meister Eckhart
PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: @
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: how to aggregate rules using ipfw2 ? Follow-up, Why Aggregate?
Markie said:
snip
ipfw add allow ip from any to { 192.168.0.0/16 or 10.0.0.0/8 }
Why aggregate? Is it more efficient?
--
Joe Sotham
Dear Sirs,
how can I aggregate rules ...
ipfw add allow ip from any to 192.168.0.0/16
ipfw add allow ip from any to 10.0.0.0/8
... into the single rule, probably using { .. or .. } syntax?
I read man page, tried few combination, but them don't work for me.
Cheers,
Ilia Chipitsine
, Drew Tomlinson wrote:
I would like to enable IPFW2 support in 4.7-STABLE. The Handbook
(http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.7R/relnotes-i386.html#AEN78) tells me
to
add 'options IPFW2' to the kernel config file and I understand that.
Then it tells me to compile libalias and ipfw
- Original Message -
From: Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Drew Tomlinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: FreeBSD Questions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 12:55 PM
On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 11:20:40AM -0800, Drew Tomlinson wrote:
I would like to enable IPFW2 support in 4.7-STABLE
.
But these rules are not working together with ipfw2 (5.0 Release). Each single rule
works fine, but when i combine them together only first of them triggers. The order
doesn't matter.
What am I doing wrong?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body
Jason Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have a problem with my dynamic IPFW2 rules - they aren't dying. The
system has been up now for 14 days, with it acting as firewall to two
systems inside. One of the systems inside is also running IPFW2, but is
in an open state. Here is the ruleset I am
I have a problem with my dynamic IPFW2 rules - they aren't dying. The
system has been up now for 14 days, with it acting as firewall to two
systems inside. One of the systems inside is also running IPFW2, but is
in an open state. Here is the ruleset I am running, I have made no
changes
OK, I've read the man page for IPFW a couple times and I am still having
difficulty setting up a working firewall. The firewall acts as a gateway
to my inside network as well as a web server and mail server. I also
need ssh connectivity from inside and out. Also, one odd thing is that I
have a
Kernel firewall settings:
options IPFW2
options IPFIREWALL #Firewall
options IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE #print info about dropped packets
options IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE_LIMIT=10 #limit verbosity
options IPV6FIREWALL
options
Hi All,
I have upgraded FreeBSD from 4.3 to 4.7 - no problems.
I now want to run with IPFW, so as the man file says, I compiled my new
kernel for 'options IPFW2' I then ran 'make -DIPFW2 ipfw2' in the
/usr/srs/sbin/ipfw dir. This compiled ok, and I manually copied it to the
/sbin dir. I tried
Didn't get an answer for this. Is it because it's supposed to be asked
in freebsd-current?
I've found that natd with ipfw2 breaks my simple ipfw rules in which
state information is kept for new outgoing tcp packets:
with 0,1.. as example rule numbers.
0 divert natd all from any to any via tun0
setup
0 packets are denied by the last deny all rule.
What happened to the packets that are supposed to be coming in via the
setup rule?
What's the proper way to do natd with ipfw2?
So far, it's the only problem with my recent testing of current :(. As a
relative newbie, updating from src
Excuse me if I'm posting to the wrong list, I thought at first that freebsd-ipfw
should be
the correct one, but obviously only discussion about the redesign of IPFW should be
discussed there.
Anyways, I hope someone can help me here..
A week ago, I made the transition from IPFW to IPFW2 (on my
: discussion about the redesign of IPFW should be discussed there.
True.
: A week ago, I made the transition from IPFW to IPFW2 (on my
: 4.7-Stable box), and I thought it would be a good idea to rewrite my
: previous stateless rules to stateful. After a few days I noticed in
: /var/log security
* Giorgos Keramidas [EMAIL PROTECTED] [021109 23:11]:
Web clients some times cache connections to web servers, hoping to save
some time from avoiding a reconnect for every GET request. Could it be
that your clients thinks that a cached connection is still valid long
after the dynamic ipfw
Hi,
Has anyone got IPFW2 working on 4.7-RELEASE? I've been using IPFW/natd
successfully since 4.2 but my attempts to do the same with IPFW2 have failed.
I added IPFW2=true to /etc/make.conf and options IPFW2 to my kernel config
then rebuilt libalias, ipfw and my kernel.
At boot I get
On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 09:13:45AM +0600, ??? wrote:
I seen few time IPFW1 and IPFW2. what is it ?
I'm running 4.5 and 4.6 and 4.6.2, but I couldn't find it in LINT, so what
is it ??
IPFW2 is the next version of the IPFW software. IPFW2 is the standard
version of IPFW in 5-CURRENT
Dear Sirs,
I seen few time IPFW1 and IPFW2. what is it ?
I'm running 4.5 and 4.6 and 4.6.2, but I couldn't find it in LINT, so what
is it ??
Regards, (îÁÉÌÕÞÛÉÅ ÐÏÖÅÌÁÎÉÑ)
Ilia Chipitsine (éÌØÑ ûÉÐÉÃÉÎ)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-questions
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 12:34:50AM +0200, Michael wrote:
Could anyone explain or direct me to any procedures for upgrading to ipfw2?
Firstly, make sure you're running a system version that includes ipfw2
support. You need to be running either 5-CURRENT or a recent version
of 4-STABLE
-Original Message-
From: Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 00:35
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Upgrading to ipfw2?
Could anyone explain or direct me to any procedures for
upgrading to ipfw2?
Assuming you already have options IPFW in your
94 matches
Mail list logo
