From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Nov 11 08:05:39 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7E5616A4CE
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:05:39 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mta9.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (mta9.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.5.42])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 757D643D2F
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:05:37 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from anthonyv@brainlink.com)
Received: from superior.local.non-standard.net
 (ool-18b9c193.dyn.optonline.net [24.185.193.147]) by mta9.srv.hcvlny.cv.net
 (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.25 (built Mar  3 2004))
 with ESMTP id <0I7000JLC95CTR@mta9.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for
 freebsd-net@freebsd.org; Thu, 11 Nov 2004 03:05:37 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 03:05:36 -0500 (EST)
From: Anthony Volodkin <anthonyv@brainlink.com>
X-X-Sender: anthonyv@superior.local.non-standard.net
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Message-id: <20041111025930.U82349@superior.local.non-standard.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: IPFW2 matching a list/set of interfaces
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:05:39 -0000

Hi,

I've been trying to implement some ipfw rules that would match several
interfaces using the recv/via/xmit keywords, however that seems to be
unsupported.  So a rule like:

ipfw add allow ip from any to 192.168.100.100 via {fxp0,ng0,xl0}

fails with an invalid ) error.  Alternatively if I use an or block, i
get an error about an invalid or block.

Does anyone know whether this is actually possible/supported/supported
in the near future?  Sure I could make a rule for each interface, but in my situation that would not scale well.

Thanks,

Anthony Volodkin