Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:29:43 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> To: "Conrad J. Sabatier" <conrads@cox.net> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: make buildkernel failed related to ip_divert module Message-ID: <417E4337.80804@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20041025214401.31d63ee4@dolphin.local.net> References: <417B128B.7080904@gddsn.org.cn> <20041024133045.40733f45@dolphin.local.net> <20041024144743.37fb5c69@dolphin.local.net> <417D5E51.2060100@freebsd.org> <20041025214401.31d63ee4@dolphin.local.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Conrad J. Sabatier wrote: > On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 22:13:05 +0200, Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> > wrote: > > >>Conrad J. Sabatier wrote: >> >>>This problem is occurring with the following kernel options: >>> >>>options IPDIVERT >>>options IPFILTER >>>options IPFILTER_LOG >>> >>>The only workaround at this time is adding "options IPFIREWALL". >> >>Yes, that is correct. >> >>IPDIVERT is a module now and you can dynamically load it just like you >>can load ipfw (options IPFIREWALL). >> >>IPDIVERT depends on ipfw being loaded or compiled into the kernel. >> >>I have done the last step of IPDIVERT's transition into a KLD a few >>minutes ago. It will warn you now if you try to compile it into a >>kernel without IPFIREWALL as well. As a module it will simply >>complain that ipfw needs to be loaded first. > > Hmmm. I'm confused now. Up until a day or two ago, the kernel would > compile just fine without IPFIREWALL. When did IPDIVERT come to depend > on IPFIREWALL, and why? > > Or maybe I'm just *really* confused. I thought I needed IPDIVERT for > ipnat to work, or am I mistaken? Yes, you are confused. ;) IPDIVERT is only required for NAT with ipfw (a.k.a. IPFIREWALL). > What exactly do I need now to use ipf and ipnat? ipf and ipnat. Nothing else in the kernel. -- Andre
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?417E4337.80804>