From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 7 13:43:07 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40A2510656CF for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 13:43:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nvass9573@gmx.com) Received: from mailout-us.gmx.com (mailout-us.gmx.com [74.208.5.67]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D939F8FC17 for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 13:43:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 07 Sep 2010 13:43:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [192.168.73.192]) [91.140.122.2] by mail.gmx.com (mp-us004) with SMTP; 07 Sep 2010 09:43:04 -0400 X-Authenticated: #46156728 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/AVXg4Z8bASaDlNAF/CP6ppYk7EIuRxoNxTEo5qA DvzzmE1zYqFqnK Message-ID: <4C864145.80805@gmx.com> Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2010 16:42:29 +0300 From: Nikos Vassiliadis User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Victor Sudakov , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <20100822052550.GA42346@admin.sibptus.tomsk.ru> <20100907090012.GA48608@admin.sibptus.tomsk.ru> <4C8616F0.5010401@gmx.com> <20100907110033.GA51618@admin.sibptus.tomsk.ru> In-Reply-To: <20100907110033.GA51618@admin.sibptus.tomsk.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: Subject: Re: ipfw fwd and ipfw allow X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2010 13:43:07 -0000 On 9/7/2010 2:00 PM, Victor Sudakov wrote: > Nikos Vassiliadis wrote: >>> Am I asking something unreasonable? >> >> Not really, but if you ask, one could say that IPFW is a "first >> match wins" firewall, so a fwd or an allow action would be the >> terminal one. You must design your rules accordingly. >> >> There is also the skipto action which can alter the way packets >> flow through the rules. >> >> Could you describe in a conrete example what you're trying to >> achieve? > > I want forwarded packets to create a dynamic "allow" rule. > You can combine fwd and keep-state. Could you be more specific?