From owner-freebsd-questions Mon Jan 6 9:32:53 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA18C37B405 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 09:32:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from dan.emsphone.com (dan.emsphone.com [199.67.51.101]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1123E43EE1 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 09:32:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com) Received: (from dan@localhost) by dan.emsphone.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) id h06HWjTm058232; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:32:45 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from dan) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:32:45 -0600 From: Dan Nelson To: Jonathan Belson Cc: Ceri Davies , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [Q] ipfw and 'me' Message-ID: <20030106173244.GA54032@dan.emsphone.com> References: <3E19B689.2090207@witchspace.com> <20030106171001.GA13668@submonkey.net> <3E19BB9E.6010207@witchspace.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E19BB9E.6010207@witchspace.com> X-OS: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT X-message-flag: Outlook Error User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In the last episode (Jan 06), Jonathan Belson said: > Ceri Davies wrote: > >On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 05:02:01PM +0000, Jonathan Belson wrote: > >>I've just been looking into the 'me' option for ipfw: > >> > >>me matches any IP address configured on an interface in the > >> system. The address list is evaluated at the time the > >> packet is analysed. > >> > >> Since the machine is a gateway, it has two network cards. Will > >> 'me' match *both* IP address or just the first one it comes > >> across? I only really want it to match the IP address of the > >> external interface, not the internal one. > > > > Both, I'm afraid. > > Hmm, I suppose since tests for IP spoofing through the external > interface have already been carried out by that point, it isn't that > much of a problem. > > Does the fancy-pants new IPFW2 allow more control for 'me'? me is me. Maybe the "recv | xmit | via {ifX | if* | ipno | any}" options will help? What exactly are you trying to allow/block? -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message