Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2005 19:46:06 +0200 (CEST) From: Oliver Fromme <olli@lurza.secnetix.de> To: freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG, vladone <vladone@spaingsm.com> Subject: Re: Another bug in IPFW@ ...? Message-ID: <200508021746.j72Hk6Wq006760@lurza.secnetix.de> In-Reply-To: <1881102745.20050802194826@spaingsm.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
vladone <vladone@spaingsm.com> wrote: > Please, explain more clearly, what u want to do? What exactly was unclear in my description? > P.S. looks very strange "out not recv any xmit" It's perfectly valid syntax according to ipfw(8). "out not recv any xmit dc0" consists of three options (i.e. match patterns): 1. "out" --> match only outgoing packets. 2. "not recv any" --> match packets that haven't been received through any interface (i.e. which originate from the local host). It's simply a negation of "recv any", see the ipfw(8) manpage. 3. "xmit dc0" --> match packets which are going to be transmitted through the dc0 interface. However, the problem is that the second option is being ignored, and I would like to know why, and how to work- around the bug. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. (On the statement print "42 monkeys" + "1 snake":) By the way, both perl and Python get this wrong. Perl gives 43 and Python gives "42 monkeys1 snake", when the answer is clearly "41 monkeys and 1 fat snake". -- Jim Fulton
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200508021746.j72Hk6Wq006760>