From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 7 18:20:11 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 600B016A4DF for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2006 18:20:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from admin2@enabled.com) Received: from typhoon.enabled.com (typhoon.enabled.com [216.218.220.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EF5C43D53 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2006 18:20:11 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from admin2@enabled.com) Received: from [172.24.241.5] (natint3.juniper.net [66.129.224.36]) (authenticated bits=0) by typhoon.enabled.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id k87IKA2J044128 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2006 11:20:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from admin2@enabled.com) Message-ID: <450062B4.7060001@enabled.com> Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 11:19:32 -0700 From: Noah User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Macintosh/20060719) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <44FF4F7F.6030800@enabled.com> <44venzu4av.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> In-Reply-To: <44venzu4av.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: Re: rc.firewall rule for passive FTP X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 18:20:11 -0000 Lowell Gilbert wrote: > Noah writes: > > >> what is a good rule to allow passive FTP to work. >> >> the following rules still blocks passive FTP. >> >> #/** Allow setup of FTP PASSIVE **/ >> ${fwcmd} add allow tcp from any to ${ip} 49152-65534 setup >> > > If the passive FTP client is on ${ip}, then that's the wrong > direction; it needs to be able to *send* the SYN. > the {$ip} refers to the IP address of rthe server. might you please help me rewrite this rule? Cheers, Noah