From owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 12 23:00:39 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34F6516A420; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 23:00:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from max@love2party.net) Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.171]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 697ED43D46; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 23:00:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from max@love2party.net) Received: from p54A3D8F9.dip.t-dialin.net [84.163.216.249] (helo=donor.laier.local) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de with ESMTP (Nemesis), id 0MKxQS-1E3iVu2foV-0001Rg; Sat, 13 Aug 2005 01:00:34 +0200 From: Max Laier To: Jeremie Le Hen Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 00:59:54 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <1123858936.22864.252.camel@torgau.office.netline.net.uk> <200508121751.27737.max@love2party.net> <20050812224055.GF45385@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> In-Reply-To: <20050812224055.GF45385@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1163691.tYQ7fp2MzY"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200508130100.09827.max@love2party.net> X-Provags-ID: kundenserver.de abuse@kundenserver.de login:61c499deaeeba3ba5be80f48ecc83056 Cc: Andrew Thompson , freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Bridge and PF X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter \(pf\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 23:00:39 -0000 --nextPart1163691.tYQ7fp2MzY Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Saturday 13 August 2005 00:40, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > Hi, > > > This is not true. As Scott suggested try if_bridge in 6.0 which has bo= th > > IPv6 > > and full pf support. Additionally, pf is supported by the old bridge > > just use the same settings you would use for ipf. The old bridge does > > not allow for stateful filtering however. The same is true for ipf and > > ipfw with the old bridge code. > > Does if_bridge generally support PF_HOOKS (thus one can use ipfw), > or is it strictly bound to pf ? As per if_bridge(4): When filtering is enabled, bridged packets will pass through the filter inbound on the originating interface, on the bridge interface and out- bound on the appropriate interfaces. Either stage can be disabled, th= is behaviour can be controlled using sysctl(8): net.link.bridge.pfil_member Set to 1 to enable filtering on the incom= ing and outgoing member interfaces, set to 0 = to disable it. net.link.bridge.pfil_bridge Set to 1 to enable filtering on the bridge interface, set to 0 to disable it. net.link.bridge.ipfw Set to 1 to enable layer2 filtering with ipfirewall(4), set to 0 to disable it. T= his needs to be enabled for dummynet(4) suppo= rt. When ipfw is enabled, pfil_bridge and pfil_member will be disabled so that IPFW= is not run twice; these can be re-enabled if desired. =2D-=20 /"\ Best regards, | mlaier@freebsd.org \ / Max Laier | ICQ #67774661 X http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/ | mlaier@EFnet / \ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Against HTML Mail and News --nextPart1163691.tYQ7fp2MzY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBC/Sn5XyyEoT62BG0RAp8sAJwITsFMqqH4YymHzncwCSg9zssaKACfbsAk Sw38Tj6lnKayxUcr9ukuXrk= =f9My -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1163691.tYQ7fp2MzY--