Re: "set skip on lo" on 12.x and 13.0

2021-02-09 Thread Marek Zarychta
W dniu 09.02.2021 o 15:55, Kristof Provost pisze: On 9 Feb 2021, at 15:50, Marek Zarychta wrote: Dear list, I am observing changed behaviour of the rule "set skip on lo". This rule previously allowed for communication between the host and the jail no only on loopback interfaces, b

"set skip on lo" on 12.x and 13.0

2021-02-09 Thread Marek Zarychta
but probably won't if it gets widely announced. -- Marek Zarychta ___ freebsd-pf@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-pf To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-pf-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: pfr_update_stats: assertion failed.

2018-06-29 Thread Marek Zarychta
f in a significant way, far more than I expected. So let me apologise for the noise here. Please keep the code unchanged and thank you for the help. Best regards, -- Marek Zarychta signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: pfr_update_stats: assertion failed.

2018-06-24 Thread Marek Zarychta
On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 01:56:07PM +0200, Kristof Provost wrote: > On 23 Jun 2018, at 18:46, Marek Zarychta wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 05:27:29PM +0200, Marek Zarychta wrote: > >> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 08:17:13PM +0200, Marek Zarychta wrote: > >>> The issu

Re: pfr_update_stats: assertion failed.

2018-06-23 Thread Marek Zarychta
On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 05:27:29PM +0200, Marek Zarychta wrote: > On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 08:17:13PM +0200, Marek Zarychta wrote: > > The issue occurred first two years ago, after upgrade from 8 to 9 > > branch. Now this i386 machine is running 11.0-STABLE and despite it was &g

Re: pfr_update_stats: assertion failed.

2018-06-23 Thread Marek Zarychta
On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 08:17:13PM +0200, Marek Zarychta wrote: > The issue occurred first two years ago, after upgrade from 8 to 9 > branch. Now this i386 machine is running 11.0-STABLE and despite it was > compiled with "WITHOUT_ASSERT_DEBUG=yes", still from time to time >

Re: udp - weird behavior of reply-to

2017-01-14 Thread Marek Zarychta
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:54:40PM +0100, Kristof Provost wrote: > On 9 Jan 2017, at 18:25, Marek Zarychta wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 07:08:10PM +0100, Kristof Provost wrote: > >> On 8 Jan 2017, at 15:55, Marek Zarychta wrote: > >> The problem description doe

Re: udp - weird behavior of reply-to

2017-01-10 Thread Marek Zarychta
On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 10:01:21PM -0500, Ian FREISLICH wrote: > On 01/09/17 17:17, Marek Zarychta wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 09:58:38PM +0100, Kristof Provost wrote: > >> On 9 Jan 2017, at 18:25, Marek Zarychta wrote: > >>> On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 07:08:10P

Re: udp - weird behavior of reply-to

2017-01-09 Thread Marek Zarychta
On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 09:58:38PM +0100, Kristof Provost wrote: > On 9 Jan 2017, at 18:25, Marek Zarychta wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 07:08:10PM +0100, Kristof Provost wrote: > >> On 8 Jan 2017, at 15:55, Marek Zarychta wrote: > >> The problem description doe

Re: udp - weird behavior of reply-to

2017-01-09 Thread Marek Zarychta
On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 07:08:10PM +0100, Kristof Provost wrote: > On 8 Jan 2017, at 15:55, Marek Zarychta wrote: > The problem description doesn’t ring any bells with me, but I’m also > not sure > I’ve fully understood it. Can you document a minimal reproduction > scenario, &

Re: udp - weird behavior of reply-to

2017-01-08 Thread Marek Zarychta
On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 07:08:10PM +0100, Kristof Provost wrote: > On 8 Jan 2017, at 15:55, Marek Zarychta wrote: > The problem description doesn’t ring any bells with me, but I’m also > not sure > I’ve fully understood it. Can you document a minimal reproduction > scenario, &

udp - weird behavior of reply-to

2017-01-08 Thread Marek Zarychta
ce the machine was running 9-STABLE and then everything worked correctly. The machine is currently running 11.0-STABLE r311637 compiled for i386 arch. Is it a bug to be officially submitted or it will not be possible to use reply-to for UDP traffic anymore? -- Marek Zarychta signature.asc De