On 20/03/2003, Srebrenko Sehic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote To [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Or even better, dis the keep state on {$ext_if $int_if}; keep
state should be enough, since pf(4) should take care of that. Now
this feature would be _very_ nice.
Any chance this could be implemented, say post 3.3?
On 10/03/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote To [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm almost totally new to pf.
I'v noticed that this syntax is not accepted:
Ext_If = rl0
MyVar = { 1.2.3.4/32, 2.1.0.0/24 }
pass in on $Ext_If from any to !$MyVar
I think this should be a honest
On 10/03/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote To Philipp Buehler -
sysfive.com GmbH:
Use { !1.2.3.4/32, !2.1.0.0/24}
Sure, i've already done that, thanks.
Anyway i think that syntax interpreted as you've done could be an
improvement in easing the ruleset of pf.conf file.
Well
On 26/02/2003, Attila Nagy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote To Roger Skjetlein:
I have at least 3 3com905 cards (don't know the exact subtypes) which
works, present you a link and a blazingly fast 6 kB/s transfer rate on a
fast ethernet network.
yah, you dont know. 3com *can* be ok, but usually they
On 25/02/2003, caracha ricardo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote To [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
can openbsd/pf handle to the protocol dlc? for example
[ mainframe ] -far away- [router] -- [ openbsd ] -- [ clients ]
beg your pardon?
pf is an ip (v4/v6) filter and can understand several protocols
on top of it
On 21/12/2002, Zafer Dastan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote To [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
hi all,
most heavily site i tested for 24 hours with PIII 1.36 Tualitin with
average state of 30K-43K with CPU load average of %20-%35 ...
i guess you use cheap NICs, or the machine is doing other stuff, too
dmesg?
