From owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 19 22:56:01 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D1EB8CE for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 22:56:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kevin.wilcox@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pa0-f54.google.com (mail-pa0-f54.google.com [209.85.220.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC5BC8FC12 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 22:56:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id kp6so3896983pab.13 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:56:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=KYH7Xn2RdleylGYLG7q9wkQTfL8qnZR3sbmD7Zh7jTM=; b=qiWd1+DsE1iUNWDvkGQS7YuoB2lYt9ZvICnqqx6ovz2gkVbd9ue/d3wvCzbQ/xPH3X M+TksGAebzNTbstCWAI6syLyFP1LuFDTonPhNxzfcdaQD8EJ/s1ECSrbv9U+mkaeOlq3 YOSaVjDvCpog+P2sc5IGRar3kEvkIEnv41N2+Pjc053Ok7+CYEaXEN5gVudZ/lbekRO4 1l6EY93jR6nt+ZxUXL9dbNAXA2rTgUQfP0DcwRy0m/9N0d4j6ukAshkfbjogR9R6rFsg Ix3qSFv+dyVtDDUmyrmU/DCK7HQhzdgallfKKkZLNudpTyJce/jDdc3Nge4lN/si9yoJ PC2Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.66.80.166 with SMTP id s6mr2523959pax.21.1353365760580; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:56:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.68.8.2 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:56:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.68.8.2 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:56:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 17:56:00 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Routing return NAT traffic based on interface From: Kevin Wilcox To: Peter McAlpine Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter \(pf\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 22:56:01 -0000 On Nov 19, 2012 5:54 PM, "Kevin Wilcox" wrote: > It is. The "pass in" rule I used in my example assumes the inside interface and the other devices it talks to are in the same network. Correction, the "pass in" and "nat" rules, not just the pass. They both have to be modified. kmw