From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 19 16:37:18 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29B2C16A4CE for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:37:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from tigra.ip.net.ua (tigra.ip.net.ua [82.193.96.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69BED43D2D for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:37:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ru@ip.net.ua) Received: from heffalump.ip.net.ua (heffalump.ip.net.ua [82.193.96.213]) by tigra.ip.net.ua (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i7JGbChS033135 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:37:12 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from ru@ip.net.ua) Received: (from ru@localhost) by heffalump.ip.net.ua (8.13.1/8.13.1) id i7JGbDoX043616; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:37:13 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from ru) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:37:13 +0300 From: Ruslan Ermilov To: Barney Wolff Message-ID: <20040819163713.GE82175@ip.net.ua> References: <41249DEA.80404@portaone.com> <200408191300.i7JD0wvm006811@the-macgregors.org> <20040819154334.GA23926@pit.databus.com> <20040819155413.GB82175@ip.net.ua> <20040819160445.GA29937@pit.databus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ZRyEpB+iJ+qUx0kp" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040819160445.GA29937@pit.databus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RELENG_5 kernel b0rken with IPFIREWALL and without PFIL_HOOKS X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:37:18 -0000 --ZRyEpB+iJ+qUx0kp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 12:04:45PM -0400, Barney Wolff wrote: > On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 06:54:13PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 11:43:34AM -0400, Barney Wolff wrote: > > > I was inspired by the PFIL_HOOKS discussion to check my firewall rule= s :) > > > There were none, other than 65535. Apparently, /etc/rc.d/ipfw attemp= ts > > > to kldload ipfw, which will fail if ipfw is compiled into the kernel, > > > and since the precmd failed, the _cmd will not be run. When did it > > > become mandatory to have ipfw as a module, not compiled in? Is there > > > some rationale for this? It strikes me as rather dangerous, especial= ly > > > for firewalls, especially when default-to-accept is chosen. Am I just > > > confused, and missing some obvious bit of config? > > >=20 > > > Is it relevant that my /usr is on vinum, and the rules are in /usr/lo= cal/etc? > > >=20 > > net.inet.ip.fw.enable is gone, and it upsets /etc/rc.d/ipfw. > > I asked Andre to follow up on this. >=20 > Yes, but aside from that, ipfw_precmd returns 1 if the kldload fails, > which if I'm not confused causes ipfw_start not to be run. At least > that's what my system as of 8/17/04 says. > Barney >=20 Yes sure. Non-existing sysctl causes kldload to be attempted, that fails (because the module already exists), and the whole /etc/rc.d/ipfw is aborted. Cheers, --=20 Ruslan Ermilov ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer --ZRyEpB+iJ+qUx0kp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBJNc5qRfpzJluFF4RAg1tAKCcyVvjIUUh8+plqW4QHp+wbm5QUgCgj1Mh ad4yczYCdG7FkFych9zwSFg= =YR16 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ZRyEpB+iJ+qUx0kp--