Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 5 Mar 2024 15:30:19 +0500
From:      "Eugene M. Zheganin" <eugene@zhegan.in>
To:        Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz>, freebsd-pf@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: dumb question about "no state"
Message-ID:  <3983e6ab-5760-408e-a3a8-b40c8eb24c1d@zhegan.in>
In-Reply-To: <88035aa9-bfd1-41f4-ba9a-08b2bc8441d1@quip.cz>
References:  <d38d0e14-4b8b-420f-b9e7-62c521f003aa@zhegan.in> <88035aa9-bfd1-41f4-ba9a-08b2bc8441d1@quip.cz>

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

On 05.03.2024 14:29, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
>
>> Why does this rule create states ? Am I misreading/misunderstanding 
>> the part "state is created unless the no state option is specified" ?
>
> Also from the man page, few lines after your citation:
>
> By default pf(4) filters packets statefully; the first time a packet 
> matches a pass rule, a state entry is created; for subsequent packets 
> the filter checks whether the packet matches any state.
>
I'm failing to see how this can explain state creation by a rule that 
clearly shouldn't create any states at all. Furthermore, state are 
(usually) created by a packet with SYN flag, in case of TCP.


Eugene.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3983e6ab-5760-408e-a3a8-b40c8eb24c1d>