Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 06:21:47 -0700 From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> To: Dan Pelleg <daniel+bsd@pelleg.org> Cc: ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ipfw2 patches for -stable available Message-ID: <20020710062146.A93900@iguana.icir.org> In-Reply-To: <15660.2959.142937.827544@gargle.gargle.HOWL>; from daniel%2Bbsd@pelleg.org on Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 06:25:19AM -0400 References: <20020709023203.A83270@iguana.icir.org> <u2sy9ckpbo1.fsf@gs166.sp.cs.cmu.edu> <20020709221347.A91104@iguana.icir.org> <15660.2959.142937.827544@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 06:25:19AM -0400, Dan Pelleg wrote: ... > That's easy: > > sh /etc/rc.firewall closed > > ipfw add 500 pass tcp from me to any keep-state limit src-addr dst-port 40 ah, that is a bug in your ruleset: "keep-state" and "limit" are incompatible, if you use one you should not use the latter. For the old code the overloading of several fields in the rule descriper masked the bug. I will add some checks in /sbin/ipfw to flag this incorrect usage. In the meantime could you check if removing "keep-state" from the limit rules still causes the problem ? > I have another bug to report. The following causes a segfault on a > DUMMYNET-less machine: > > ipfw queue 1 config pipe 10 weight 100 mask src-ip 0xffffffff will look into this. thanks again luigi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020710062146.A93900>