From owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Apr 17 09:48:26 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC764106566B;
	Tue, 17 Apr 2012 09:48:26 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from cell.glebius.int.ru (glebius.int.ru [81.19.64.117])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61F388FC08;
	Tue, 17 Apr 2012 09:48:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from cell.glebius.int.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by cell.glebius.int.ru (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q3H9mPKj099970;
	Tue, 17 Apr 2012 13:48:25 +0400 (MSK)
	(envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org)
Received: (from glebius@localhost)
	by cell.glebius.int.ru (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q3H9mPbD099969;
	Tue, 17 Apr 2012 13:48:25 +0400 (MSK)
	(envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cell.glebius.int.ru: glebius set sender to
	glebius@FreeBSD.org using -f
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 13:48:25 +0400
From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>
To: Ermal Lu?i <eri@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20120417094825.GC99119@glebius.int.ru>
References: <201204151200.q3FC0LT5085161@freefall.freebsd.org>
	<20120416185949.GC92286@FreeBSD.org>
	<CAPBZQG2Tjg36GNCBetRZ20FhQnL1sK9i_-oQDDb97bcb4N=sLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120417081406.GA93887@glebius.int.ru>
	<CAPBZQG2gF8GSx6eE4jkFuOf29c-jB09Gz6=+kbpXprN8XiEE4w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120417084608.GA99119@glebius.int.ru>
	<CAPBZQG0ujzB+7xTFpvhjRVbrtBEeABXHeKDx-WjbSOaAWX0-sA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAPBZQG0ujzB+7xTFpvhjRVbrtBEeABXHeKDx-WjbSOaAWX0-sA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: kern/164402: [pf] pf crashes with a particular set of rules when
 first matching packet arrives
X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter
	\(pf\)" <freebsd-pf.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-pf>,
	<mailto:freebsd-pf-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-pf>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-pf@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-pf-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-pf>,
	<mailto:freebsd-pf-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 09:48:27 -0000

  Replying on only on paragrapg, everything else agreed.

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 11:33:27AM +0200, Ermal Lu?i wrote:
E> The only problem i might see is when running more than one firewall
E> together but still there are other issues when you do that at pfil(9)
E> level.

Well, playing with two firewalls was never safe and clear, there always
be edge cases in such setups.

E> Also, if_simloop is not meant for packet leaving the host so that
E> should be safe no?

Shouldn't live, but it still enters pfil(9) and there one or other
firewall can again bounce it in any direction. Probable M_SKIP_FIREWALL
is good idea.

-- 
Totus tuus, Glebius.