Re: pf state-policy floating to if-bound

On 15/06/2023 19:07, Peter Nicolai Mathias Hansteen wrote: >> On 15 Jun 2023, at 16:26, Kapetanakis Giannis >> wrote: >> After applying some keep state (if-bound) on major rules, I 've already >> found a problem. >> >> pfsync. >> >> It copies the interface. The interfaces are different on the

Re: pf state-policy floating to if-bound

> On 15 Jun 2023, at 16:26, Kapetanakis Giannis > wrote: > After applying some keep state (if-bound) on major rules, I 've already found > a problem. > > pfsync. > > It copies the interface. The interfaces are different on the backup firewall > so the states will not match if I demote

Re: pf state-policy floating to if-bound

On 15/06/2023 17:17, Kapetanakis Giannis wrote: > Hello, > > I'd like to make a change to my firewall/router from the default state-policy > floating to if-bound > > I believe the way my pf.conf is configured it will not do any harm but I'm > being cautious here and I'd like some info. > > The

pf state-policy floating to if-bound

Hello, I'd like to make a change to my firewall/router from the default state-policy floating to if-bound I believe the way my pf.conf is configured it will not do any harm but I'm being cautious here and I'd like some info. The way I see it, I have two states for each packet traveling either

explanation of pf state-policy floating vs if-bound?

I'm running OpenBSD 4.1 release. Does anyone have a definitive explanation of the difference between pf state being floating vs if-bound, and when one or the other should / must be used? The rest of this email is just explaining why I'm asking the question. I've seen Henning Brauer say use