From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Jul 4 7:14:51 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mail.ruhr.de (in-ruhr2.ruhr.de [141.39.224.60]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 74C9F37B5A2 for ; Tue, 4 Jul 2000 07:14:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ue@nathan.ruhr.de) Received: (qmail 31694 invoked by alias); 4 Jul 2000 14:15:50 -0000 Received: (from ue@localhost) by nathan.ruhr.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA01116 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 4 Jul 2000 15:45:28 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ue) Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2000 15:45:23 +0200 From: Udo Erdelhoff To: FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: ipfw & natd strangeness Message-ID: <20000704154523.C240@nathan.ruhr.de> References: <20000704140841.A240@nathan.ruhr.de> <20000704142639.L82739@draenor.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <20000704142639.L82739@draenor.org>; from marcs@draenor.org on Tue, Jul 04, 2000 at 02:26:39PM +0200 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Jul 04, 2000 at 02:26:39PM +0200, Marc Silver wrote: > I'm not entirely sure that count will work the way you want it to if > you're going to be using packet forwarding. I don't intend to keep those rules during "normal" operation. They're just traffic detectors while I'm trying to understand ipfw's and natd's way of operation (and the interaction between the two). If it's neccessary to use another method of packet forwarding to make things work, so be it. /s/Udo To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message