IP[6]FW and active FTP

Hi, I am wondering howto support non passive FTP sessions with IPFW or IP6FW. It looks that IPFilter supports this feature, but what's about the regular FreeBSD Firewall ? I would prefer to use ipfw because I do not want to change my IPFW rules. Thanks, Vincent To Unsubscribe: send mail to

Re: RES_INSECURE and CHECK_SRVR_ADDR in resolver functions (IPv6 anycast response problem)

> > On Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:59:54 +1000, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > > > IPv6 anycast addresses are a joke as they are currently > > defined. Don't bother with them until there behaviour > > gets redefined by the IETF. > > (I'm just asking,) what is the "joke" part of the

sendto question

Hi All, I have question on sendto? If we set the socket address as 255.255.255.255. Will the packet be broadcasted on all (broadcastable) interfaces? I have two broadcastable interfaces but I observed it sends to only one interface? Anything else has to done to send broadcast on all interfac

Re: RES_INSECURE and CHECK_SRVR_ADDR in resolver functions (IPv6anycast response problem)

> On Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:59:54 +1000, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > IPv6 anycast addresses are a joke as they are currently > defined. Don't bother with them until there behaviour > gets redefined by the IETF. (I'm just asking,) what is the "joke" part of the current de

clusters not used in /dev/tun ?

Hi, I noticed that tunwrite() does not allocate a cluster, even if the size of the packet is greater than or equal to MINCLSIZE. Rather it stores the packet in a mbuf chain. Is there any reason why this is so ? I thought that packets with size >= MINCLSIZE are traditionally stored in clusters.

Re: More on MPD PPTP problem

That fixed the problem. All five now load. Thanks a bunch. Elliott Archie Cobbs wrote: > Elliott Perrin writes: > >>Sep 18 14:21:34 gw mpd: [moveable5] can't name ppp node: Address already in use >> > > This is a somewhat obscure error caused by using bundle names that > are longer than NG_N

Re: RES_INSECURE and CHECK_SRVR_ADDR in resolver functions (IPv6 anycast response problem)

> > Hello: > > I need to make some tests with IPv6 anycast addresses, > and I've found out that when /etc/resolv.conf has an > IPv6 anycast address, the DNS response isn't accepted because > it comes from an unicast IPv6 address. > > I've been digging into the source code of > /usr/src/lib/lib

Re: ppp client-callback

Michael Bretterklieber writes: > Does mpd support client-callback? No, sorry. -Archie __ Archie Cobbs * Packet Design * http://www.packetdesign.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsub

Re: Desired feature: ipfw pass for routed IPs

On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 11:14:01AM -0700, Crist J. Clark wrote: > On input packets, it'd be painful and not really practical. On output > packets, it shouldn't be _too_ bad since the routing information would > be available. > > I'm not quite sure I understand why it would be needed. If there isn

Re: MPD as a PPTP server

Elliott Perrin writes: > I am not currently on freebsd-net so if you could cc me in replies it would be > appreciated. > > I have a FreeBSD 4.6.2-RELEASE running mpd 3.9 serving as a PPTP server. > > I have setup PPTP boxes using MPD before but have run into a problem this time. In > the past

Re: More on MPD PPTP problem

Elliott Perrin writes: > Sep 18 14:21:34 gw mpd: [moveable5] can't name ppp node: Address already in use This is a somewhat obscure error caused by using bundle names that are longer than NG_NODELEN (16+NUL). Try replacing "movable*" with "mov*" everywhere in mpd.conf & mpd.links. -Archie

Re: Desired feature: ipfw pass for routed IPs

On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 11:07:07AM +0300, Adrian Penisoara wrote: > Hi, > > When building anti-spoofing firewall rules on a routing server it > would be very helpfull to have a way to tell ipfw (or other firewalling > mechanisms) to pass all pachets that the source or destination IP has a > val

RES_INSECURE and CHECK_SRVR_ADDR in resolver functions (IPv6 anycast response problem)

Hello: I need to make some tests with IPv6 anycast addresses, and I've found out that when /etc/resolv.conf has an IPv6 anycast address, the DNS response isn't accepted because it comes from an unicast IPv6 address. I've been digging into the source code of /usr/src/lib/libc/net/res_* and I've f

Re: Broken IPv4 in IPv6 on -current?

On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 08:05:29PM -0400, Trish Lynch wrote: > FreeBSD femme.sapphite.org 5.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT #16: Mon Sep 9 > 10:23:22 EDT 2002 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/admins/obj/admins/src/sys/FEMME i386 > > its pretty bizarre It's disabled by default: [238]cicely8> sysctl net.in

Desired feature: ipfw pass for routed IPs

Hi, When building anti-spoofing firewall rules on a routing server it would be very helpfull to have a way to tell ipfw (or other firewalling mechanisms) to pass all pachets that the source or destination IP has a valid (static/daemon) routing entry in the kernel. Something maybe like: