Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 13:27:37 +0300 From: freebsd@tern.ru To: Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net> Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re[2]: ipfw question Message-ID: <445120208.20040209132737@tern.ru> In-Reply-To: <20040206111051.GB724@straylight.m.ringlet.net> References: <614479869.20040206131706@tern.ru> <20040206103833.GD4848@straylight.m.ringlet.net> <1424875954.20040206134618@tern.ru> <20040206111051.GB724@straylight.m.ringlet.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
It's funny. This (your) variant:
ipfw add count from IP1 not to { IP2,IP3 }
was accepted by ipfw but resulted in (was rewritten by ipfw as) the rule:
ipfw add count from IP1 to not IP2,IP3
So, I guess that my initial
ipfw add count from IP1 to not IP2,IP3
should be what I was looking for.
Thank you for your reply.
Indeed
not to { IP2,IP3 }
is more clear sentence from the point of human logic then the one used
by ipfw :)
Alex.
PP> On Fri, Feb 06, 2004 at 01:46:18PM +0300, freebsd@tern.ru wrote:
PP> [actually, I wrote]
>> PP> Could you try
>> PP> ipfw add count from IP1 to not { IP2,IP3 }
>>
>> Definitely I tried it already before writing to group. It does not
>> work.
>> Here is the exact error message for this try:
>> ipfw: hostname ``'' unknown
PP> Er, sorry, my mistake; could you try 'not to' instead of 'to not'? :)
PP> G'luck,
PP> Peter
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?445120208.20040209132737>