From owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 5 17:23:34 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C562A16A41F for ; Thu, 5 Jul 2007 17:23:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from llevier@argosnet.com) Received: from mx.levier.org (ns.argosnet.com [213.251.139.26]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BF0213C447 for ; Thu, 5 Jul 2007 17:23:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from llevier@argosnet.com) Received: from localhost (ns [213.251.139.26]) by mx.levier.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D41E267FAC; Thu, 5 Jul 2007 19:23:35 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at argosnet.com Received: from mx.levier.org ([213.251.139.26]) by localhost (ns.levier.org [213.251.139.26]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jbCAf5-gAQAb; Thu, 5 Jul 2007 19:18:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from Osgiliath.argosnet.com (tirion.argosnet.com [82.224.1.141]) by mx.levier.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F2E7267F61; Thu, 5 Jul 2007 18:43:43 +0200 (CEST) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 18:43:40 +0200 To: "Gilberto Villani Brito" From: Laurent LEVIER In-Reply-To: <6e6841490707050611l66b7b705h2889dcaf8a2fc784@mail.gmail.co m> References: <20070705062546.BF688267E13@mx.levier.org> <6e6841490707050611l66b7b705h2889dcaf8a2fc784@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Message-Id: <20070705164343.3F2E7267F61@mx.levier.org> Cc: "FreeBSD \(PF\)" Subject: Re: Issue with PF on FreeBSD 6.2.5? 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: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 17:23:34 -0000 At 15:11 05/07/2007, Gilberto Villani Brito wrote: >Hi Laurent, Hi Gilberto, >I have the same problem, but this is because PF works with sessions, >on end of a session it will block the next session. Agree, but it is not acceptable. You can imagine a tunnel setup on the access? The user could remain years connected. When I pfctl -k the host, it does not help. Brgrds Laurent LEVIER Systems & Networks Senior Security Expert, CISSP CISM