Re: machine locks with PF (without using user dependent rules)

2005-02-08 Thread Emanuel Strobl
Am Dienstag, 8. Februar 2005 14:18 schrieb Max Laier: > On Monday 07 February 2005 16:52, Emanuel Strobl wrote: [...] > Do you have pfsync compiled in? Is it up? If that's the case, can you try No, I don't have pfsync in the kernel, also I don't have modules on that box. > to reproduce with a k

Re: machine locks with PF (without using user dependent rules)

2005-02-08 Thread Max Laier
On Monday 07 February 2005 16:52, Emanuel Strobl wrote: > Resuming work on this, I managed to get a remote console to the box and > here's what I get with today's RELENG_5 and the following command, also I > need to set debug.mpsafenet to 0 otherwise my ruleset doesn't work (do what > it should do

Re: PANIC: Re: machine locks with PF (without using user dependent rules)

2005-02-07 Thread Emanuel Strobl
Am Montag, 7. Februar 2005 17:32 schrieb Emanuel Strobl: > Am Montag, 7. Februar 2005 16:52 schrieb Emanuel Strobl: > > Am Samstag, 8. Januar 2005 18:24 schrieb Max Laier: > > > On Saturday 08 January 2005 17:52, Robert Watson wrote: > > > > On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote: > > > > >

PANIC: Re: machine locks with PF (without using user dependent rules)

2005-02-07 Thread Emanuel Strobl
Am Montag, 7. Februar 2005 16:52 schrieb Emanuel Strobl: > Am Samstag, 8. Januar 2005 18:24 schrieb Max Laier: > > On Saturday 08 January 2005 17:52, Robert Watson wrote: > > > On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote: > > > > my machine hard locks with the attached ruleset. If I set > > > >

Re: machine locks with PF (without using user dependent rules)

2005-02-07 Thread Emanuel Strobl
Am Samstag, 8. Januar 2005 18:24 schrieb Max Laier: > On Saturday 08 January 2005 17:52, Robert Watson wrote: > > On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote: > > > my machine hard locks with the attached ruleset. If I set > > > debug.mpsafenet to 0 everything is fine. This was a wild guess from

Re: machine locks with PF (without using user dependent rules)

2005-01-08 Thread Harald Schmalzbauer
Am Samstag, 8. Januar 2005 18:24 schrieb Max Laier: > Yes, it is not intended. Please keep in mind that debug.mpsafenet cannot > be alterted at runtime, hence rc.conf would be too late anyway. Just > making that clear. Right, but I meant that at least a note would pop up which tells me to modif

Re: machine locks with PF (without using user dependent rules)

2005-01-08 Thread Max Laier
On Saturday 08 January 2005 17:52, Robert Watson wrote: > On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote: > > my machine hard locks with the attached ruleset. If I set > > debug.mpsafenet to 0 everything is fine. This was a wild guess from me, > > I could nowhere find the info that PF needs this tw

Re: machine locks with PF (without using user dependent rules)

2005-01-08 Thread Robert Watson
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote: > my machine hard locks with the attached ruleset. If I set > debug.mpsafenet to 0 everything is fine. This was a wild guess from me, > I could nowhere find the info that PF needs this tweaking and I think > it's not intended, otherwise it would be

machine locks with PF (without using user dependent rules)

2005-01-08 Thread Harald Schmalzbauer
Dear all, my machine hard locks with the attached ruleset. If I set debug.mpsafenet to 0 everything is fine. This was a wild guess from me, I could nowhere find the info that PF needs this tweaking and I think it's not intended, otherwise it would be done in rc.conf e.g. I read about user depen