From owner-freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Sun Jan 8 18:08:13 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2EA3CA5AF9 for ; Sun, 8 Jan 2017 18:08:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kp@FreeBSD.org) Received: from venus.codepro.be (venus.codepro.be [IPv6:2a01:4f8:162:1127::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.codepro.be", Issuer "Gandi Standard SSL CA 2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 804F51AE9 for ; Sun, 8 Jan 2017 18:08:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kp@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [10.0.2.164] (ptr-8ripyyi2hbevfdej7yn.18120a2.ip6.access.telenet.be [IPv6:2a02:1811:2419:4e02:f161:e32d:7614:810f]) (Authenticated sender: kp) by venus.codepro.be (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73B2F1F6CD; Sun, 8 Jan 2017 19:08:11 +0100 (CET) From: "Kristof Provost" To: "Marek Zarychta" Cc: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: udp - weird behavior of reply-to Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2017 19:08:10 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20170108145532.GA17695@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl> References: <20170108145532.GA17695@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; markup=markdown Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: MailMate (2.0BETAr6072) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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: Sun, 08 Jan 2017 18:08:13 -0000 On 8 Jan 2017, at 15:55, Marek Zarychta wrote: > Is it a bug to be officially submitted or it will not be possible to > use > reply-to for UDP traffic anymore? > The problem description doesn’t ring any bells with me, but I’m also not sure I’ve fully understood it. Can you document a minimal reproduction scenario, with a pf.conf and perhaps network captures documenting the problem? There’s certainly not been a conscious decision to break UDP reply-to. Regards, Kristof