From owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 28 19:59:01 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CD5616A400 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:59:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Greg.Hennessy@nviz.net) Received: from smtp.nildram.co.uk (smtp.nildram.co.uk [195.112.4.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7A3F13C48C for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:59:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Greg.Hennessy@nviz.net) Received: from gw2.local.net (unknown [62.3.210.251]) by smtp.nildram.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0F082BD051 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 20:58:53 +0100 (BST) From: "Greg Hennessy" To: "'Drew Tomlinson'" , References: <460AA59C.2000704@mykitchentable.net> In-Reply-To: <460AA59C.2000704@mykitchentable.net> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 20:58:52 +0100 Message-ID: <000301c77173$8265dd00$87319700$@Hennessy@nviz.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AcdxYw5cABzBj6GfSGeIqvVdj/7DqQADveDA Content-Language: en-gb X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 000728-2, 28/03/2007), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Cc: Subject: RE: Why Does This Packet Match This Rule? X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:59:01 -0000 > (and the rest). What am I missing? >From the rule snippets posted, 'keep state' & 'keep state flags S/SA' comes to mind. You should endeavour to keep state on each and every rule and only establish tcp state on the 3 way handshake. > > If it helps, I also posted my complete pf.conf and the rules to which > it > expands at http://drew.mykitchentable.net/Temp/pf.conf.htm Not seeing this, connection times out. What exactly are you trying to do with what looks like a SoHo policy expanding into > 80 rules ? Greg