Re: any reason not to enable IPDIVERT for ipfw module?

2014-10-31 Thread Ian Smith
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 18:28:28 -0700, Freddie Cash wrote: > On Oct 31, 2014 12:12 PM, "John-Mark Gurney" wrote: > > > > Can any one think of a good reason not to enable IPDIVERT sockets in > > the ipfw module? Yes, two. Nowadays people are just as or perhaps mo

Re: any reason not to enable IPDIVERT for ipfw module?

2014-10-31 Thread Freddie Cash
On Oct 31, 2014 12:12 PM, "John-Mark Gurney" wrote: > > Can any one think of a good reason not to enable IPDIVERT sockets in > the ipfw module? > > And possibly enabling default to accept? That way you don't have to > go to the console when you load the ipfw mo

Re: any reason not to enable IPDIVERT for ipfw module?

2014-10-31 Thread John-Mark Gurney
John-Mark Gurney wrote this message on Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:12 -0700: > Can any one think of a good reason not to enable IPDIVERT sockets in > the ipfw module? sorry, ignore this... didn't realize ipdivert was loadable as a separate module, ipdivert... -- John-

any reason not to enable IPDIVERT for ipfw module?

2014-10-31 Thread John-Mark Gurney
Can any one think of a good reason not to enable IPDIVERT sockets in the ipfw module? And possibly enabling default to accept? That way you don't have to go to the console when you load the ipfw module because you forgot to auto add the accept all rule? :) something like: //depot/pro

IPDIVERT

2004-02-03 Thread Max Khon
hi, there! I would like to add IPDIVERT option to GENERIC kernels on all platforms and to CFLAGS for ipfw module. This will allow using natd out of box. I'll commit this change by the end of this week if there will be no objections. Regards,

Re: nat / ipdivert problem - if possible please help

2001-12-16 Thread Crist J . Clark
68.0.99 > > I have a win2k server at 192.168.0.1 > > I want to route telnet service on .99 to .3 > that means if you telnet from .1 to .99 the laptop answers on 3 > > This feature requires ipfw/natd and I have made a kernel for this (IPFIREWALL, > IPDIVERT) > > I d

nat / ipdivert problem - if possible please help

2001-12-16 Thread Boris Köster
telnet from .1 to .99 the laptop answers on 3 This feature requires ipfw/natd and I have made a kernel for this (IPFIREWALL, IPDIVERT) I don´t know how to continue, i tried this on the bsd server: /sbin/ipfw -f flush /sbin/ipfw add divert natd all from any to any via ed0 /sbin/ipfw add pass all from

Re: IPFIREWALL + BRIDGE + IPDIVERT doesn't work?

2001-02-06 Thread Luigi Rizzo
kernel > with all those options just to make sure it's not just me. > > -Alfred > > > > Let me apologize in advance for this shoddyish bug report. > > > > > > In a recent -stable (since the new ipfw fixes) if you build > > > a kernel with

Re: IPFIREWALL + BRIDGE + IPDIVERT doesn't work?

2001-02-06 Thread Alfred Perlstein
ce for this shoddyish bug report. > > > > In a recent -stable (since the new ipfw fixes) if you build > > a kernel with options: > > > > IPFIREWALL > > IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE > > IPFIREWALL_DEFAULT_TO_ACCEPT > > IPDIVERT > > BRIDGE > > DUMMYNET &g

Re: IPFIREWALL + BRIDGE + IPDIVERT doesn't work?

2001-02-06 Thread Luigi Rizzo
the new ipfw fixes) if you build > a kernel with options: > > IPFIREWALL > IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE > IPFIREWALL_DEFAULT_TO_ACCEPT > IPDIVERT > BRIDGE > DUMMYNET > > You wind up with a kernel that doesn't grok the ipfw 'via' keyword. > > Basicall

IPFIREWALL + BRIDGE + IPDIVERT doesn't work?

2001-02-06 Thread Alfred Perlstein
Let me apologize in advance for this shoddyish bug report. In a recent -stable (since the new ipfw fixes) if you build a kernel with options: IPFIREWALL IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE IPFIREWALL_DEFAULT_TO_ACCEPT IPDIVERT BRIDGE DUMMYNET You wind up with a kernel that doesn't grok the ipfw 'vi