From owner-freebsd-ipfw Wed Dec 8 7:41:45 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rdc1.tn.home.com (ha1.rdc1.tn.home.com [24.2.7.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9189D14FC7 for ; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 07:41:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from williamsl@Home.Com) Received: from RELIABLE ([24.4.115.31]) by mail.rdc1.tn.home.com (InterMail v4.01.01.00 201-229-111) with ESMTP id <19991208154134.RFEK7535.mail.rdc1.tn.home.com@RELIABLE> for ; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 07:41:34 -0800 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 10:39:36 -0500 From: Ben WIlliams X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.34a) UNREG / CD5BF9353B3B7091 Reply-To: Ben WIlliams X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <10444.991208@Home.Com> To: freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: divert rules Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG freebsd-ipfw, Wednesday, December 08, 1999 Hi all! I have a question about some observed behaviour of ipfw and I'd like to ask you all if it's right, proper, expected, etc. and why since the man-page seems to indicate otherwise. According to the ipfw man page: "... divert port Divert packets that match this rule to the di- vert(4) socket bound to port port. The search ter- minates. ... If a packet matches more than one divert and/or tee rule, all but the last are ignored. ..." However when playing with divert rules on my natd box whenever I had more than one divert rule -each- rule would be triggered. The effect this had was to have multiple replies sent to any request the inside boxes made. Is this the expected behaviour? (Doesn't seem that way to me...) The divert rules were all together if that has anything to do with it. -- Ben mailto:williamsl@Home.Com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message