From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Wed Apr 21 07:16:13 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 164535F9D33 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 07:16:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from x9k@charlie.emu.st) Received: from f3.bushwire.net (f3.bushwire.net [203.0.120.11]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FQBfy4HPDz4k2H for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 07:16:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from x9k@charlie.emu.st) Received: by f3.bushwire.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id E4A813AD3A; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 17:15:50 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/simple; d=emu.st; s=2019; t=1618989350; bh=9LXM67p2KnyQfF1j+gEb3He2+y4=; h=Comments:Received:From:Comments:Message-ID:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:To:Subject: Content-Disposition:Date; b=i4fDKMQ6Guoo06pj+F6x/h2sB86WHHiGbb+0SGzbUo9fOgQM6DpPvDR+HXUeqQOiP XD49T313QnwRo+vPRL6lC7Y0Nx+VBjHdFPk9XFPdVUCt4afERpFm2LGz6SviUpb/IV gvccqxfEPDao2P2nefD5fRufmbVDIvIFX0VCLOz0=VCLOz0= Comments: QMDA 0.3a Received: (qmail 72042 invoked by uid 1001); 21 Apr 2021 07:15:50 -0000 From: "Mark Delany" Comments: QMDASubmit submit() 0.2.0-final Message-ID: <0.2.0-final-1618989350.827-0x8feb00@qmda.emu.st> References: <0.2.0-final-1618742820.474-0x878fa2@qmda.emu.st> <20210420021318.GB18217@blisses.org> <0.2.0-final-1618896757.688-0xb6a34e@qmda.emu.st> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 In-Reply-To: To: FreeBSD Hackers Subject: Re: Various problems with 13.0 amd64 on vultr.com Content-Disposition: inline Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 07:15:50 +0000 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4FQBfy4HPDz4k2H X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=fail (headers rsa verify failed) header.d=emu.st header.s=2019 header.b=i4fDKMQ6; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of x9k@charlie.emu.st designates 203.0.120.11 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=x9k@charlie.emu.st X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.17 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.97)[0.971]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:203.0.120.0/24]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[emu.st]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[203.0.120.11:from:127.0.2.255]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[emu.st:-]; R_DKIM_REJECT(1.00)[emu.st:s=2019]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[203.0.120.11:from]; ASN(0.00)[asn:4764, ipnet:203.0.120.0/24, country:AU]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-hackers] X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 07:16:13 -0000 On 20Apr21, Freddie Cash allegedly wrote: > If you re-write your rules to use the in-kernel libalias support instead of > divert sockets sending traffic to natd, does it stay up while passing IPv4 > traffic? > > That would help narrow it down even further to natd issues. I've not used the in-kernel NAT support before so it'll take me a little while, but I'll give it a shot and report back. Mark.