Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2023 12:25:37 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ipfw@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 267278] ipfw mask addr:mask syntax creates wrong rule Message-ID: <bug-267278-8303-0yGe1aBWp4@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-267278-8303@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-267278-8303@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D267278 --- Comment #5 from Marek Zarychta <zarychtam@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl> --- (In reply to Andrey V. Elsukov from comment #4) Thank you for the reply, Andrey, and for upstreaming this awesome, pioneer NAT64 module (pioneer with regard to the state of the three FreeBSD firewal= ls). Hijacked PR is not a usual way to troubleshoot things, but people might ben= efit from following the thread, so I will go on. It indeed works 100% as expected in netisr mode, pipes in both directions a= re respected. With net.inet.ip.fw.nat64_direct_output=3D1, packets still go th= rough=20 one pipe - from the local IPv6 NATed64 pool to 64:ff9b::/96 My concern is the requirement to set net.inet.ip.fw.one_pass=3D0, but proba= bly without this setting dummynet and nat64lsn aren't supposed to work together= , is that right? --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-267278-8303-0yGe1aBWp4>