From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 6 07:07:47 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B70C0106566B for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2012 07:07:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from azanar@carrel.org) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 843718FC08 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2012 07:07:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iadj38 with SMTP id j38so3069956iad.13 for ; Thu, 05 Jan 2012 23:07:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.50.89.197 with SMTP id bq5mr6186709igb.24.1325833666948; Thu, 05 Jan 2012 23:07:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from rowlf.sea.carrel.org (dsl231-050-036.sea1.dsl.speakeasy.net. [216.231.50.36]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id py4sm128033486igc.2.2012.01.05.23.07.44 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 05 Jan 2012 23:07:45 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Edward Carrel In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 23:06:47 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ermal_Lu=E7i?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pf not seeing inbound packets on netgraph interface X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 07:07:47 -0000 On Jan 4, 2012, at 12:03 AM, Ermal Lu=E7i wrote: > Can you see if on the enc(4) interface pf(4) sees both side of the = traffic? I can on enc0. Doing a tcpdump(1) shows me traffic traveling both ways. = Should there be a pf(4) interface for me to listen on? I've listened on = pflog(4), and only seen traffic going one way, even when I have relevant = rules set to "log(all)" > Also please describe/post what is the ruleset of blindly passing = packets and the ruleset that you define as 'keep state'!? =46rom my /etc/pf.conf: pass in quick log(all) on enc0 no state pass out quick log(all) on enc0 no state pass out quick log(all) on ng0 proto tcp from ng0 to 10.0.0.0/8 pass in quick log(all) on ng0 proto tcp from 10.0.0.0/8 to ng0 If I assert the last two rules as being explicitly 'no state' things = continue to work after the stateful tracking drops the entry due to = never seeing the SYN-ACK responding to my SYN to the remote end. - Ed=