On 2/3/15 6:23 PM, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 03.02.2015 13:04, Ian Smith wrote:

Now to make stateful firewall with NAT you need to make some not
very "readable" tricks to record state ("allow") of outbound
connection before NAT, but pass packet to NAT after that. I know
two:

(a) skipto-nat-allow pattern from many HOWOTOs
Lev, can you provide references for these HOWTOs you refer to?

I have a suspicion that some of them should be taken out and shot.
  google for "FreeBSD ipfw nat stateful" :) There are lot of them. Not
real HOWTOs, but blog posts & alike.

  BTW, without new mechanism it is really hard to do such firewall, as
we need action (nat) after "allow keep-state". It could be done with
this ugly skip-to or with "allow keep-state" in INCOMING section of
firewall, what is not much better, as I prefer to decide let packet
out or not in OUTCOMING part of firewall and with "allow keep-state"
in incoming path it flood state table with unused states.

  Another problem, that "keep-state" acts as "check-state" too, so you
could not have ANOTHER "keep-state" before NAT in outgoing part or you
miss nat completely (sate is created in outgoing path, and then
checked before nat in outgoing path with "keep-state", grrrrr, ugly!).

yes I think "keep-state" should be deprecated and replaced or supplemented by 'save_state' that does NOT do an implicit 'check-state'.. I don't know whose idea that was but it's just wrong. (if the state exists, maybe just replace it..)




- -- // Lev Serebryakov AKA Black Lion
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
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=FJZe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ipfw
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ipfw-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


_______________________________________________
freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ipfw
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ipfw-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to