Date: 30 Nov 2005 11:40:12 -0500 From: Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pf blocking nfs Message-ID: <44zmnm2ioj.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> In-Reply-To: <20051130125225.GJ27673@merkur.atekomi.net> References: <60336.192.168.3.69.1133319528.squirrel@webmail.proficuous.com> <438D1894.90500@mac.com> <63871.192.168.3.69.1133320948.squirrel@webmail.proficuous.com> <438D1D95.7010503@mac.com> <65229.192.168.3.69.1133323019.squirrel@webmail.proficuous.com> <20051130125225.GJ27673@merkur.atekomi.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Will Maier <willmaier@ml1.net> writes: > On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 09:56:59PM -0600, Aaron P. Martinez wrote: > > > Aaron P. Martinez wrote: > [...] > > I realize i could just accept all udp packets from the NFS server or even > > just ports 2049, but the underlying question is, why isn't my "keep state" > > rule handling this. > > I don't use pf (or NFS), but UDP is a stateless protocol. I wouldn't > be surprised if pf couldn't keep track of its state... No, that's a big part of *why* you want pf to keep track of its state.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44zmnm2ioj.fsf>