Hi,
Will this be backed out, or do you know of a work around to this
issue?
---Mike
At 07:17 PM 2/3/2002 -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
>In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Michael Nottebrock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>: Greg Prosser wrote:
>:
>: > FWIW, my problem was a change in the ip stack.
>: >
>: > We now drop 127.* packets on the floor if they come in across an interface
>: > that is not lo0. Since ipnat redirect rules happen below the ip stack,
>: > packets which are rewritten by ipnat to use a 127.* address get dropped on
>: > the floor when they enter the stack. ipnat records the redirect as having
>: > worked, but the packet just disappears silently. This totally breaks
>: > my transparent proxy, as I forward the connections to 127.0.0.1 via ipnat.
>:
>:
>: Ugh. This probably means that transparent squid proxying will also break
>: and _that_ scares me (no touchy cvsup for my -STABLE box). You might
>: want to contact the committer about this.
>
>It is certainly looking like this change will be backed out. It is
>well intended, but breaks too many things. :-(
>
>Warner
>
>To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400
Sentex Communications, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Providing Internet since 1994 www.sentex.net
Cambridge, Ontario Canada www.sentex.net/mike
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
