From owner-freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Tue Mar 27 15:19:15 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DEAFF5F51F for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 15:19:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5B8B6BAA7 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 15:19:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2381A2FA2 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 15:19:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w2RFJEMu044443 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 15:19:14 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w2RFJEaq044428 for freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 15:19:14 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 226850] [pf] Matching but failed rules block without return Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 15:19:14 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: vegeta@tuxpowered.net X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter \(pf\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 15:19:15 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D226850 --- Comment #10 from vegeta@tuxpowered.net --- Any rule can fail like this, not only route-to rules, so it is not specific= to them. And I'm taking about responding with RST/ICMP to new connections when redirection table is already empty. Injecting RSTs during killing of existing connections I already have written and it is done using new sysctls, so I always assumed that it would be too = much to include in upstream code. Let's not get into that in this bug report, I = will be of course happy to share code (it is on GitHub in fact), just email me if you want to discuss it. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=