From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org  Sun Sep  4 16:51:19 2016
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 772FFA9D8DB
 for <freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Sun,  4 Sep 2016 16:51:19 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz)
Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B8296B8
 for <freebsd-jail@freebsd.org>; Sun,  4 Sep 2016 16:51:18 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz)
Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62FD228430;
 Sun,  4 Sep 2016 18:51:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from illbsd.quip.test (ip-86-49-16-209.net.upcbroadband.cz
 [86.49.16.209])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B091828411;
 Sun,  4 Sep 2016 18:51:15 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <57CC5103.9090200@quip.cz>
Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2016 18:51:15 +0200
From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
 rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/35.0 SeaMonkey/2.32
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Grzegorz Junka <list1@gjunka.com>,
 "freebsd-jail@freebsd.org" <freebsd-jail@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Changing jail's IP automatically
References: <872dfbe1-3f39-bf5f-44b2-611bd92a1210@gjunka.com>
 <4fa37d2e14665ff5a00548626e55142f@gritton.org>
 <F9734DA1-D3BE-46C8-87C7-91C4C4B653F1@Lodge.me.uk>
 <9fd404a3-f1cc-4510-1d38-5ca8dc85f5d3@gjunka.com>
In-Reply-To: <9fd404a3-f1cc-4510-1d38-5ca8dc85f5d3@gjunka.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" <freebsd-jail.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-jail>,
 <mailto:freebsd-jail-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-jail/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-jail@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-jail-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-jail>,
 <mailto:freebsd-jail-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2016 16:51:19 -0000

Grzegorz Junka wrote on 09/04/2016 18:32:
> Probably it would, I didn't try. Is this is the proper way of solving
> this issue?

If I was you I will definitely use 1:1 biNAT. Because then you can write 
PF rules in way without knowing the future IP assigned by DHCP. (you 
will use interface name, not IP on this interface)

> On 03/09/2016 15:49, James Lodge wrote:
>> Would PF and NAT not work for you? NAT to the WLAN0 IP (DHCP assigned)
>> using PF macros and have a separate subnet for your jails? This would
>> be PAT so you might have issues with accessing services inbound if
>> you're using the same port in multiple jails. Just an idea.....