Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:54:23 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>
To:        Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: ipfw
Message-ID:  <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040811175316.28766B-100000@fledge.watson.org>
In-Reply-To: <16666.37963.904734.842647@ran.psg.com>

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

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004, Randy Bush wrote:

> ipfw seems to be starting in some strange state where it has loaded my
> ruleset but does not really process it.  everything ends up in
> unreachable.  if i run `ipfw -q /etc/ipfw.rules`, the same command set
> that's in /etc/rc.conf, it takes off as expected. 

The recent addition of O_ANTISPOOF renumbered the IPFW rule operations, so
if you're using a newer kernel and an older user space, /sbin/ipfw will
think the rules mean one thing, but the kernel will think they mean
another.  The miscreant has been convinced that this is a bad idea (always
append!) but since the damage was done we decided not to thrash the
operator numbers again. 

Robert N M Watson             FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects
robert@fledge.watson.org      Principal Research Scientist, McAfee Research




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040811175316.28766B-100000>