I am seeing the same errors on FreeBSD 9-STABLE using a tun-device.
/K
On 19-12-2011 09:06, lini...@freebsd.org wrote:
Old Synopsis: PF state key linking mismatch
New Synopsis: [pf] PF state key linking mismatch
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-pf
Responsible-Changed-By: lini
Hey,
As of time being, we still include pf as of OpenBSD 4.1 (released May 2007).
Recently syntax has changed a lot in the releases of pf in OpenBSD 4.7,
just notice that "nat-to" and "rtr-to" are now part of the
pass-commands. This means also means that refereeing to the OpenBSD FAQ
from th
Hope someone can hint me on pf_send_tcp/pf_route.
Thanks,
Kristian
On 30-01-2010 05:11, Kristian Kræmmer Nielsen wrote:
Hey,
I am experiencing an issue using reply-to on block rules.
I am a "nice" firewall administrator and always uses "block return"
rules, thereby pf sen
poofed your packet
filter will be sending tcp rst/icmp packets back to the wrong IP, and
you are also doubling the resources taken for dealing with what is
essentially spurious traffic. It's not a big deal normally but if
someone attempts some form of denial of service, it won't he
for the server.
Could someone check to see if pf respects "reply-to" when sending reset
packages (block return)?
Or if that is not the case explain to me what "reply-to" is suppose to
do on "block"-rules?
Best regards,
Kristian Kræmmer Nielsen,
Odense, Denmark
