On Nov 23, 2011, at 17:02, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> After upgrading to 9.0 my NanoBSD images stopped supporting pf. I get errors
> like:
>
> pfctl: DIOCGETRULES: Permission denied
> pfctl: DIOCADDRULE: Operation not supported by device
Hmpfr - booting
/SOEKRIS
What am I missing? It's essentially the same config I used with 8.2.
Ask
--
Ask Bjørn Hansen, http://askask.com/
On Nov 16, 2009, at 2:44, Denny Lin wrote:
>
>> I'm trying to avoid keeping state of ntp requests to our ntp servers. They
>> are on UDP and numerous, so it's just wasting a lot of space in the state
>> table.
>>
>> I've tried various variations of 'pass quick', but some rule keeps adding
>
Hi,
I'm trying to avoid keeping state of ntp requests to our ntp servers. They are
on UDP and numerous, so it's just wasting a lot of space in the state table.
I've tried various variations of 'pass quick', but some rule keeps adding state
for the port 123 requests. I've put the full output
On Aug 5, 2008, at 6:48, Rodrique Heron wrote:
I'm a running a Apache reverse proxy on PF+CARP, one node as master
the
other backup. I want a active/active setup, but since I don't have a
hardware load balancer I'm banking on DNS. I would like to
understand what
happens when a host connects
Hi,
I see in the OpenBSD documentation that they have a "carpdev" option
to specify which physical interface the redundancy group should run on.
FreeBSD (current 6.2 code) doesn't have that option -- is there
another way to accomplish the same thing?
- ask
--
http://develooper.com/ -
On Sep 6, 2006, at 20:17, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
Sorry about replying to my own mail, I figured I should include a bit
more debug information.
This is from the Fedora box (64.81.32.148) (behind the freebsd/pf
bridge/firewall). It looks like the Fedora box is closing the
connection
On Sep 6, 2006, at 20:17, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote:
I am having a bit of trouble with my pf ruleset that I can't figure
out.
My ISP gives me a few static IPs, so I have a Soekris box running
as a bridging firewall running 6.0-RELEASE-p4.
It does NAT for my RFC1918 net and doe
Hi everyone,
I am having a bit of trouble with my pf ruleset that I can't figure out.
My ISP gives me a few static IPs, so I have a Soekris box running as
a bridging firewall running 6.0-RELEASE-p4.
It does NAT for my RFC1918 net and does the bridging firewall for my
public IPs.
I've pos
Hi,
With the following simple ruleset pf is not letting any traffic in or
out (it's a much much simplified version of the real ruleset I had
prepared). What am I doing wrong?
int_if = "sis0"
altq on $int_if cbq bandwidth 1200Kb queue { std_in }
queue std_in bandwidth 1.2Mb priority 2 cbq(defau
10 matches
Mail list logo
