From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 7 05:01:55 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45D95106564A for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 05:01:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tundra@tundraware.com) Received: from ozzie.tundraware.com (ozzie.tundraware.com [75.145.138.73]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 092968FC13 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 05:01:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (viper.tundraware.com [192.168.0.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by ozzie.tundraware.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id pB751kto022592 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 23:01:46 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from tundra@tundraware.com) Message-ID: <4EDEF33A.1020801@tundraware.com> Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 23:01:46 -0600 From: Tim Daneliuk User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110922 Thunderbird/3.1.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FreeBSD Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (ozzie.tundraware.com [192.168.0.1]); Tue, 06 Dec 2011 23:01:46 -0600 (CST) X-TundraWare-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-TundraWare-MailScanner-ID: pB751kto022592 X-TundraWare-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-TundraWare-MailScanner-From: tundra@tundraware.com X-Spam-Status: No Subject: SOLVED: ipfw And ping 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: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 05:01:55 -0000 I have a fairly restrictive firewall but I wanted to open a hole for ping and traceroute - both outbound from a NATed LAN as well as inbound to the boundary FreeBSD machine. The magic sauce turned out to be: ipfw add allow icmp from any to any icmptypes 0,3,4,8,11,12 The other insight here was that this rule had to occur *after* NAT got setup or internal users on the LAN would not be able to ping. Many thanks especially go to Robert Bonomi and Ian Smith for their help and patience with my foolish questions... Tim