Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:54:52 -0700 From: "Jon Simola" <jsimola@gmail.com> To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: why are pf-blocked ips 'leaking' thru to spamd? Message-ID: <8eea04080704271154q4a714cdre3adc5c009e52d5c@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <70f41ba20704271143i962a7d3r821ddd34a4409f53@mail.gmail.com> References: <70f41ba20704271105m11fa5315kc7c3d715f2d63f61@mail.gmail.com> <8eea04080704271127g70d910bfg82ec652a0c6889bf@mail.gmail.com> <70f41ba20704271143i962a7d3r821ddd34a4409f53@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 4/27/07, snowcrash <schneecrash+pf@gmail.com> wrote: > > Multiple tables in rules are tricky because they are not treated as > > "sets" that can be arbitrarily compared (ie, IPs in table A that are > > not in table B). > so, *IS* there a way to accomplish that? namely, match against a > boolean-composite of tables? On OpenBSD, I use spamd-setup which does exactly that with the whitelist/blacklist tables. One could probably hack up a cron-able sed/awk/perl thingy to read from 2 tables, mash up the contents however you wish, and fill a 3rd table with the result. -- Jon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8eea04080704271154q4a714cdre3adc5c009e52d5c>