From owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Sun Jun 23 06:31:46 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE01415C6E7F for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2019 06:31:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D62275897 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2019 06:31:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 1B7F015C6E7D; Sun, 23 Jun 2019 06:31:45 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ipfw@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08A6315C6E7C for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2019 06:31:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94B6475894 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2019 06:31:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C84DBFB8E for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2019 06:31:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x5N6VhSG015981 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2019 06:31:43 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x5N6VhNj015980 for ipfw@FreeBSD.org; Sun, 23 Jun 2019 06:31:43 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ipfw@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 238694] Configuring & using a customized IPFW rule set now causes additional rules to be (involuntarily) added Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2019 06:31:43 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: conf X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: regression X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: rkoberman@gmail.com X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ipfw@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2019 06:31:46 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D238694 --- Comment #14 from rkoberman@gmail.com --- 9.1 is years newer than this change. You would have to go back to 7.2 or 6.= 3 to predate the IPFW rule inclusion and much older, probably to at least 2.2, to predate the loopback insertion. I suspect that ipv6_available was set to '0' when the network startup actua= lly brought up an IPv6 connection, but I have yet to find any code to that does= so. Back a few years ago the loopback stuff was changed from using rules starti= ng will 1000 and incrementing by 1000 for wash run to starting with 100 and incrementing vy 100. Initially only the first rule was added and later the rules at 2000 and 3000 ere added. Those are now at 200 and 300. Nothing has changed in the firewall rules insertions between 9.1 and 12.0. I am trying = to track down where ipv6_available might have been in 11.2. Guess I'll need to look back a lot further... but not tonight. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=