My OpenBSD system has several network cards.
- pppoe0 - is connected to DSL line
- fxp0 - is connected to switch for local network
- ral0 - is wireless
I am able to access internet from computers on LAN.
From outside my home; I am able to use port 2000 to access a Win2K system.
When I try to
Frank Bax wrote:
When I try to access the same Win2K system on port 11005; I get
connection refused.
match in on $ext_if inet proto tcp from any to ($ext_if) port 2000
rdr-to $win2k
match in on $ext_if inet proto tcp from any to ($ext_if) port 11005
rdr-to $win2k
Sorry for the noise.
hi,
good day, how do i do an alternate sets of route-to rules for the internal
interface loaded in an anchor?
btw im doing a failover between two firewalls,
|--| |-|
| internet | | internet |
|--|
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 06:49:05PM +0800, Jay Jesus Amorin wrote:
hi,
good day, how do i do an alternate sets of route-to rules for the internal
interface loaded in an anchor?
btw im doing a failover between two firewalls,
|--| |-|
|
I write this mail because I want to ask few questions about pf and
queuing.
Sorry, my english grammar is bad. English is a foreign language for me,
I usually speak Romanian and Hungarian.
I have a small computer network at home. This network have a gateway
(OpenBSD 3.8).
The scenario :
1)
I was looking at the pf.conf included with 3.8, and with the
addition of the following line:
set skip on { lo }
doesn't the lo part of the following line become redundant:
antispoof quick for { lo $int_if }
assuming both lines are uncommented?
Thanks.
Rodney Hopkins
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 2005-12-04 at 11:39:01 -0800, Rodney Hopkins proclaimed...
I was looking at the pf.conf included with 3.8, and with the
addition of the following line:
set skip on { lo }
doesn't the lo part of the following line become redundant:
antispoof quick for { lo $int_if }
It becomes
eric wrote:
On Sun, 2005-12-04 at 11:39:01 -0800, Rodney Hopkins proclaimed...
I was looking at the pf.conf included with 3.8, and with the
addition of the following line:
set skip on { lo }
doesn't the lo part of the following line become redundant:
antispoof quick for { lo $int_if }
It
--On 04 December 2005 14:27 -0600, eric wrote:
On Sun, 2005-12-04 at 11:39:01 -0800, Rodney Hopkins proclaimed...
I was looking at the pf.conf included with 3.8, and with the
addition of the following line:
set skip on { lo }
doesn't the lo part of the following line become redundant:
9 matches
Mail list logo
