From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 1 13:09:04 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2A27106564A for ; Tue, 1 May 2012 13:09:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mikemacleod@gmail.com) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85B318FC0C for ; Tue, 1 May 2012 13:09:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iahk25 with SMTP id k25so7642005iah.13 for ; Tue, 01 May 2012 06:09:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=/RabKJNuO61KKfoEYDUEnNuJ+T5MwlAQ/HARxiQhyMA=; b=k/8MkTNByyQRAks92RqoA7RAOIrkvzD+TjPNC3Snmx/UP938j4sWhrS+NcyPWpQPjM KRTmBoPTXocypVurBvaT/QANYxyWkn9wkH8tU9OtsOBVkAI/aNQaqNwI4CXKKrIXR6yU mcMLLw0RXiHBd4MRWyOiTunQNm89cOLJWqLJpuNgoqQO65nMb4QPzO8aIgB97HQniCDb HJgjqTrugtBuAZGTVWV3fY1fz3eOKQsMVehmTa4nXn30sawWkUwFe1qX8xshBwcy/6ER xtDWSQFXpjE3uf05aXUa7Jq5SUkC5UqTSiivu3ezZ99BP0/NUQuqbjQBHfvnptdl0Q9/ AfFA== Received: by 10.50.193.132 with SMTP id ho4mr1712750igc.17.1335877744181; Tue, 01 May 2012 06:09:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.133.6 with HTTP; Tue, 1 May 2012 06:08:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4F9F4949.20706@gmail.com> References: <4F9E270F.3070605@gmail.com> <4F9F4949.20706@gmail.com> From: Michael MacLeod Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 09:08:44 -0400 Message-ID: To: Darren Pilgrim Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Full Cone NAT In PF X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 13:09:04 -0000 Alright, here's a copy of my pf.conf: http://pastie.org/private/yt7h3erbowgg4pf5v7fh5a As for patches... unfortunately I'm not too sharp with C. On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Darren Pilgrim wrote: > On 2012-04-30 17:44, Michael MacLeod wrote: > >> At the end of the day we could solve it by getting our ISP to route a >> /29 to their house and using binat (I already have a /29), but it would >> be nice if there was the option to use 'nat on $wan_if from -> >> ($wan_if) full-cone' in a ruleset to achieve the correct behaviour. >> > > Patches welcome. :) > > Facetiousness aside, you can make the rules more broad, even create "DMZ > host" rules on a per-remote-IP basis. If you post your pf.conf (a pastie > URI would be best), we can look and see if there's something amiss. >