I have no idea how I could make my question any clearer:
> My question is not about how to disable pf, but rather why the packets
> are see as "in" when coming from my own address, and, why they are
> blocked i.e. ...
On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 11:09:27AM -0600, Zack Newman wrote:
> For added
On 7/6/23 06:14, Why 42? The lists account. wrote:
Hi,
I see that I was not clear enough.
You were not. One of the first things in your initial e-mail was the
following:
"While trying to debug the issue, it occurred to me that it could be a
network / pf problem. This doesn't seem to be the
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 10:42:39AM -0600, Zack Newman wrote:
> ...
> I am guessing you didn't flush the rules after disabling pf since
> clearly pf rules are still being used. Run pfctl -F all after disabling
> pf. Run pfctl -s all to verify there are no active rules.
Hi,
I see that I was not
On 7/4/23 10:36, "Why 42? The lists account.":
While trying to debug the issue, it occurred to me that it could be a
network / pf problem. This doesn't seem to be the issue though, even
after I disable pf (pfctl -d), the scanner is still not seen.
However, running "tcpdump -n -e -ttt -i
On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 07:32 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greetings,
Does it make any difference if I group my rules like this .
it can be, depending on your situation. PF rules are read top to
bottom, therefore, lower rules can override rules that were previously
defined.
if you want
On 2/20/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greetings,
Does it make any difference if I group my rules like this .
## logs smtp sessions
pass in log on $ext_if proto tcp to $mailhost port smtp keep state
## Pass all outgoing traffics
pass out on $ext_if inet proto tcp all
6 matches
Mail list logo
