From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 11 15:14:39 2004 Return-Path: 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 3456316A4CE for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:14:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (xorpc.icir.org [192.150.187.68]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12E7043D31 for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:14:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rizzo@icir.org) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.11/8.12.8) with ESMTP id iABFEGba090101; Thu, 11 Nov 2004 07:14:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: (from rizzo@localhost) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.11/8.12.3/Submit) id iABFEGak090100; Thu, 11 Nov 2004 07:14:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 07:14:16 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo To: Anthony Volodkin Message-ID: <20041111071416.A90040@xorpc.icir.org> References: <20041111025930.U82349@superior.local.non-standard.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20041111025930.U82349@superior.local.non-standard.net>; from anthonyv@brainlink.com on Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 03:05:36AM -0500 cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:14:39 -0000 On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 03:05:36AM -0500, Anthony Volodkin wrote: > 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. or blocks are supported with any option so chances are that you are using the wrong syntax (which is _not_ the one above) to specify them. If you post the offending line maybe we can spot the problem cheers luigi