Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 17 Apr 2012 13:48:25 +0400
From:      Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Ermal Lu?i <eri@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: kern/164402: [pf] pf crashes with a particular set of rules when first matching packet arrives
Message-ID:  <20120417094825.GC99119@glebius.int.ru>
In-Reply-To: <CAPBZQG0ujzB%2B7xTFpvhjRVbrtBEeABXHeKDx-WjbSOaAWX0-sA@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <201204151200.q3FC0LT5085161@freefall.freebsd.org> <20120416185949.GC92286@FreeBSD.org> <CAPBZQG2Tjg36GNCBetRZ20FhQnL1sK9i_-oQDDb97bcb4N=sLA@mail.gmail.com> <20120417081406.GA93887@glebius.int.ru> <CAPBZQG2gF8GSx6eE4jkFuOf29c-jB09Gz6=%2BkbpXprN8XiEE4w@mail.gmail.com> <20120417084608.GA99119@glebius.int.ru> <CAPBZQG0ujzB%2B7xTFpvhjRVbrtBEeABXHeKDx-WjbSOaAWX0-sA@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
  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.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120417094825.GC99119>