From owner-freebsd-security Fri Aug 25 4:30: 4 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.via-net-works.net.ar (ns1.via-net-works.net.ar [200.10.100.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BB7737B42C for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 04:29:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from fpscha@localhost) by ns1.via-net-works.net.ar (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA20559; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 08:29:48 -0300 (GMT) From: Fernando Schapachnik Message-Id: <200008251129.IAA20559@ns1.via-net-works.net.ar> Subject: Re: ipfw & ospf In-Reply-To: from Roger Marquis at "Aug 24, 0 09:58:31 pm" To: marquis@roble.com (Roger Marquis) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 08:29:48 -0300 (GMT) Cc: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Reply-To: Fernando Schapachnik X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL40 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org En un mensaje anterior, Roger Marquis escribió: > Does anyone know why trafshow/tcpdump still reports OSPF traffic > after the application of these ipfw rules? > > /sbin/ipfw add 115 deny ospf from any to any > /sbin/ipfw add 115 deny all from 224.0.0.0/8 to any Prior rules allow it? Is local host running ospfd or something alike? Good luck. Fernando P. Schapachnik Administración de la red VIA NET.WORKS ARGENTINA S.A. fernando@via-net-works.net.ar (54-11) 4323-3333 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message