From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jul 28 16:21:28 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D459416A4CE
	for <questions@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:21:28 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from lilzmailso02.liwest.at (lilzmailso02.liwest.at [212.33.55.24])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9893243D3F
	for <questions@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:21:28 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from dgw@liwest.at)
Received: from cm248-230.liwest.at ([81.10.248.230])
	by lilzmailso02.liwest.at with esmtp (Exim 4.24)
	id 1BprB5-0007Od-Uw; Wed, 28 Jul 2004 18:21:15 +0200
From: Daniela <dgw@liwest.at>
To: "Steve Bertrand" <iaccounts@ibctech.ca>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:13:27 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3
References: <200407281452.00859.dgw@liwest.at>
	<200407281705.42474.dgw@liwest.at>
	<3983.209.167.16.15.1091031516.squirrel@209.167.16.15>
In-Reply-To: <3983.209.167.16.15.1091031516.squirrel@209.167.16.15>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200407281713.27154.dgw@liwest.at>
cc: questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Problems after IP change
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dgw@liwest.at
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:21:29 -0000

On Wednesday 28 July 2004 16:18, Steve Bertrand wrote:
> > On Wednesday 28 July 2004 15:53, Steve Bertrand wrote:
> >> >> I figured so...what happens if you add 'keep-state' to rules 20000,
> >> >> 20002
> >> >> and 20003?
> >> >
> >> > Nothing.
> >> > BTW, here we have the problem: The initial SYN packet isn't matched by
> >> > rule
> >> > 11700 (setup keep-state). Setup means the SYN flag is set, right?
> >>
> >> AFAIK, setup means the SYN bit MUST be set. Try these rules:
> >> > add 01900 deny log tcp from any to any in established
> >>
> >> add 2000 allow log all from any to any in via rl1 keep-state
> >> add 2002 allow log all from any to any out via rl0 keep-state
> >>
> >> > So why
> >> > is
> >> > it not matched? If I remove the "setup" keyword to match all outgoing
> >> > packets, the SYN/ACK from the server is still denied by rule 01900.
> >>
> >> I'll go over the ruleset again here and see if I can find a misplaced
> >> 'out' or 'in'.
> >
> > Now it is getting funny. I played around with the ruleset, adding and
> > removing
> > count log rules. Suddenly it worked. I removed all extra count log rules,
> > and
> > compared the resulting ruleset file with the backup I made before.
> > Nothing changed! Was that a bug?
>
> I'd like to see the difference. Could you post this output? (The contents
> of rules.patch).
>
> # diff orig_rules_file new_rules_file > rules.patch

Nothing! That produces an empty file.