On Thu, 29 Jul 2004, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > Hello Charlie, > > > I'm running ipf because I like it ...but now I need to use ipfw's pipe > > feature. I was thinking that I could just run both, and keep all my > > rules in ipf, then in ipfw: limit bandwidth for a few vlans, then allow all. > > > > It didn't work (no rate-limiting happened).. and I'm thinking that ipf > > is passing the packets and bypassing ipfw? Or something.. > > > > So, what is the order, if I'm running ipf AND ipfw at the same time? > > Will it work at all in this manner? > > But you should be warned that using ipnat(8) in conjunction to ipfw > pipes may lead to an incorrect behaviour : > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/61685
in addition, http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/46564 reverses the order in which ipfw/ipfilter/ipnat processes packets in ip_output.c to make it consistent if both are used. by default the flow is: wire -> ipnat -> ipfilter -> ipfw -> kernel -> ipfilter -> ipnat ->ipfw the patch in the above PR changes it to: wire -> ipnat -> ipfilter -> ipfw -> kernel -> ipfw -> ipfilter -> ipnat personally, i prefer the patch to ip_output as it makes it cleaner when you're separating between using ipfw/dummynet for shaping and ipfilter/ipnat for firewalling. Regards, /\_/\ "All dogs go to heaven." [EMAIL PROTECTED] (0 0) http://www.alphaque.com/ +==========================----oOO--(_)--OOo----==========================+ | for a in past present future; do | | for b in clients employers associates relatives neighbours pets; do | | echo "The opinions here in no way reflect the opinions of my $a $b." | | done; done | +=========================================================================+ _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
