From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Tue Jun 18 12:35:05 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC3F715BA29A; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 12:35:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hausen@punkt.de) Received: from kagate.punkt.de (kagate.punkt.de [217.29.33.131]) (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 5DA017261C; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 12:35:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hausen@punkt.de) Received: from hugo10.ka.punkt.de (hugo10.ka.punkt.de [217.29.44.10]) by gate2.intern.punkt.de with ESMTP id x5ICZ0eV038730; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 14:35:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.29.44.36] ([217.29.44.36]) by hugo10.ka.punkt.de (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id x5ICZ0hJ072373; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 14:35:00 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hausen@punkt.de) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) Subject: Re: Eliminating IPv6 (?) From: "Patrick M. Hausen" In-Reply-To: <23816.53518.998090.665606@jerusalem.litteratus.org> Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 14:35:00 +0200 Cc: "Ronald F. Guilmette" , Artem Viklenko via freebsd-net , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <9AF5DF39-9B81-4270-B25C-D089C971E924@punkt.de> <19574.1560847186@segfault.tristatelogic.com> <23816.53518.998090.665606@jerusalem.litteratus.org> To: Robert Huff X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 5DA017261C X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of hausen@punkt.de designates 217.29.33.131 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=hausen@punkt.de X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.84 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.97)[-0.967,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:217.29.32.0/20]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[punkt.de]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-0.998,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: mailin.pluspunkthosting.de]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.86)[-0.859,0]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[131.33.29.217.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.10.0]; IP_SCORE(-0.20)[ipnet: 217.29.32.0/20(-0.56), asn: 16188(-0.45), country: DE(-0.01)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16188, ipnet:217.29.32.0/20, country:DE]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_HAS_QUESTION(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, 18 Jun 2019 12:35:05 -0000 Hi all, > Am 18.06.2019 um 13:54 schrieb Robert Huff : >=20 > If this is true - haven't checked personally - then it's a bug. > (And a non-trivial one, the fact you're the first to report it > notwithstanding.) > Can you please open a bug report? I doubt it would qualify as a bug - possibly a bug in the docs, yes. Because the observed behaviour is definitely intentional. The flow of = statements in rc.firewall is: 0. flush all rules 1. setup_loopback 2. setup_ipv6_mandatory and no configuration is going to skip that - hence the only way is to = use firewall_script. Then it goes on: 3. is firewall_type one of the predefined =E2=80=9Eopen=E2=80=9C, = =E2=80=9Esimple=E2=80=9C, etc.? =E2=80=94> configure accordingly 4. if not and firewall_type points to a readable file, suck in = rules from there So, yes, there will always be mandatory IPv6 rules in place. That=E2=80=99= s why they are called mandatory, I figure ;-) Kind regards, Patrick --=20 punkt.de GmbH Internet - Dienstleistungen - Beratung Kaiserallee 13a Tel.: 0721 9109-0 Fax: -100 76133 Karlsruhe info@punkt.de http://punkt.de AG Mannheim 108285 Gf: Juergen Egeling