Re: PF once rule should not trigger removal of parent anchor rule

2016-10-26 Thread Mike Belopuhov
On 21 October 2016 at 17:39, Alexandr Nedvedicky wrote: > Hello Mike, > (I'm putting tech@ back) > >> Or some other changes if expire has happened with the deferred removal in >> the thread. What I saying is basically that the last fix I did for once >> rules was

Re: PF once rule should not trigger removal of parent anchor rule

2016-10-21 Thread Alexandr Nedvedicky
Hello Mike, (I'm putting tech@ back) > Or some other changes if expire has happened with the deferred removal in > the thread. What I saying is basically that the last fix I did for once > rules was tested in the scenario you've described. sorry I've messed up my description well enough to

PF once rule should not trigger removal of parent anchor rule

2016-10-20 Thread Alexandr Nedvedicky
Hello, Petr Hoffmann at Oracle discovered a glitch in ONCE rules and anchors. Petr's test case, which shows a misbehavior looks as follows: echo 'anchor "foo/*"' | pfctl -f - pfctl -sr # anchor "foo/*" all echo 'pass' | pfctl -a foo/bar -f - echo 'pass