On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 02:44:09AM +0100, Marko Cuk wrote:
> Max, tnx for explanation and others to help.
>
> Second thing is route-to routing capability of pf.
> I have one dual homed firewall and the configuration is very
> complicated, because I must have two NAT's ( certain subnets through on
The following reply was made to PR kern/84370; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: "Ricardo A. Reis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: Re: kern/84370: [modules] Unload pf.ko cause page fault
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 20:24:16 -0200
hi mlaier,
I've this pro
I was having trouble implementing the ftp-proxy daemon as well
I got it working after doing a few things,
I upgraded to 6.0 (its a old U1 Sparc64 Sun netra)
I discovered from the pf.conf man that it says "the use of the group and
user filter parameter in conjunction with a Giant-free netstack can
On Tue, 8 Nov 2005 19:45:59 +0100
Max Laier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 November 2005 18:15, Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 02:39:02PM +0100, Marko Cuk wrote:
> > > It seems that it work. Thanks.
> > >
> > > Damn, for vlan's ( 802.1Q) you should specif
On Tuesday 08 November 2005 18:15, Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 02:39:02PM +0100, Marko Cuk wrote:
> > It seems that it work. Thanks.
> >
> > Damn, for vlan's ( 802.1Q) you should specify "em", for "tun", vice
> > versa... what a mess, hehe.
>
> No prob; I don't see w
Hello,
I'm still having issues with ftp. I've got a 6.0 machine acting as a
firewall/gateway for my network of natted machines. Machines behind the
gateway can ftp passively just fine, active no. The gateway can't do either
or. I've run some tcpdump and the block by default rule is stoppi
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 02:39:02PM +0100, Marko Cuk wrote:
> It seems that it work. Thanks.
>
> Damn, for vlan's ( 802.1Q) you should specify "em", for "tun", vice
> versa... what a mess, hehe.
No prob; I don't see why using the em(4) backing the tun(4) wouldn't
work for ALTQ _IF_ you actually
Synopsis: [modules] Unload pf.ko cause page fault
State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
State-Changed-By: mlaier
State-Changed-When: Tue Nov 8 17:01:24 GMT 2005
State-Changed-Why:
Can you provide a trace or at least an IP + related source code for this?
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs
Synopsis: [pf] Packet Filter rule not working properly (with SYNPROXY option)
State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
State-Changed-By: mlaier
State-Changed-When: Tue Nov 8 16:51:34 GMT 2005
State-Changed-Why:
In order to debug this problem, more information is required. Can you please
discuss wit
Synopsis: [pf] [panic] carp with pfsync causing system crash, dump debug
attached
State-Changed-From-To: feedback->closed
State-Changed-By: mlaier
State-Changed-When: Tue Nov 8 16:48:44 GMT 2005
State-Changed-Why:
Fixed in RELENG_5 and later as confirmed by originator - Thanks.
http://www.freeb
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 11:42:36PM -0800, Alberto Alesina wrote:
> My question is - would *only* ICMP echo *replies* be
> allowed back against that state? Or, would *any* ICMP
> traffic with the corresponding ICMP ID, source address
> and destination address be allowed?
The latter.
> If *any* I
11 matches
Mail list logo
