Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 29 Nov 1999 17:25:20 -0800
From:      O'Shaughnessy Evans <oevans@acm.org>
To:        ipfilter@coombs.anu.edu.au, current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: IP Filter 3.3.3 in FreeBSD -CURRENT [LONG]
Message-ID:  <19991129172520.M6038@zero.wumpus.org>
In-Reply-To: <19991130032407.A68259@demos.su>; from mishania@demos.net on Tue, Nov 30, 1999 at 03:24:07AM %2B0300
References:  <99112814445100.78810@Amber.XtremeDev.com> <3643.991128@v-wave.com> <99112816325700.79094@Amber.XtremeDev.com> <99112912214800.72589@Amber.XtremeDev.com> <19991129141516.J6038@zero.wumpus.org> <19991130032407.A68259@demos.su>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Mikhail A. Sokolov" <mishania@demos.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 1999 at 02:15:16PM -0800, O'Shaughnessy Evans wrote:
> # Davec <Davec@unforgettable.com> wrote:
> # [...]
> # > But when I try to load any rules, I get the error messages above.
> # > Same  result with ipnat. I checked to make sure I was using the
> # > right version of ipf:
> # [...]
> # 
> # So could it be that some of your rules are breaking things?  I think I've
> # seen the same error message when trying to write a rule for a non-existant
> # interface name or a group that wasn't created with "... head N".
> 
> No, it can't. He was refering to ipf -V; I managed to reproduce the
> behaviour several days ago, but since I remade the devices it's ok in
> my case, but in his.  Again, no other rules/whatever is being used in
> the test, just ipf -V.

Makes sense.  I get the same message, BTW, on my Solaris 7 box when the
ipf kernel module isn't loaded and I run "ipf -V".

-- 
O'Shaughnessy Evans


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19991129172520.M6038>