On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Peter N. M. Hansteen wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 10:11:19PM +1100, John Tate wrote:
> > I have sucessfully got an OpenBSD machine to connect via ADSL and forward
> > packets, I am gradually upgrading my pf.conf. I am having trouble with
> this
> > configuratio
i would concur that anchors are cleaner than redefining macros, but
they do require rewriting rules
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Bret S. Lambert wrote:
> Take a look at pf anchors.
>
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 10:21:14PM +1100, John Tate wrote:
>> Is there a way to control ports on a filter fro
On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 10:11:19PM +1100, John Tate wrote:
> I have sucessfully got an OpenBSD machine to connect via ADSL and forward
> packets, I am gradually upgrading my pf.conf. I am having trouble with this
> configuration (ignore some obvious bugs related to table names where tables
> are de
On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 10:21:14PM +1100, John Tate wrote:
> Is there a way to control ports on a filter from the command line? I guess
> I just have manually adding and deleting rules.
the cycle
$ sudo mg /etc/pf.conf
$ sudo pfctl -vf /etc/pf.conf
doesn't take terribly long to begin with, but
Take a look at pf anchors.
On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 10:21:14PM +1100, John Tate wrote:
> Is there a way to control ports on a filter from the command line? I guess
> I just have manually adding and deleting rules.
>
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Andres Perera wrote:
>
> > the documentation
You could use macro instead of table for port.
Michel
2011/12/8 John Tate
> Misc,
>
> I have sucessfully got an OpenBSD machine to connect via ADSL and forward
> packets, I am gradually upgrading my pf.conf. I am having trouble with this
> configuration (ignore some obvious bugs related to tabl
define the list of ports as a macro and use pfctl -D
not much adding as it is replacing the whole list:
$ echo 'pass proto udp from port $pl' | pfctl -nvf- -Dpl='{1 2 3}'
pass proto udp from any port = 1 to any
pass proto udp from any port = 2 to any
pass proto udp from any port = 3 to any
On Thu
Is there a way to control ports on a filter from the command line? I guess
I just have manually adding and deleting rules.
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Andres Perera wrote:
> the documentation is pretty clear by saying that tables can only hold
> addresses, not a random set of numbers
>
> On
the documentation is pretty clear by saying that tables can only hold
addresses, not a random set of numbers
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 6:41 AM, John Tate wrote:
> Misc,
>
> I have sucessfully got an OpenBSD machine to connect via ADSL and forward
> packets, I am gradually upgrading my pf.conf. I am
Is there a way to have it so I can add ports from the command line if I
can't use tables?
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Peter Hessler wrote:
> Yes, tables in PF only support IP addresses.
>
>
> On 2011 Dec 08 (Thu) at 22:11:19 +1100 (+1100), John Tate wrote:
> :At the moment I am working on d
Yes, tables in PF only support IP addresses.
On 2011 Dec 08 (Thu) at 22:11:19 +1100 (+1100), John Tate wrote:
:At the moment I am working on doing some things as tables. I want tables to
:hold the ports, but it appears perhaps they can only hold IP addresses. The
:following tables do not work fro
Misc,
I have sucessfully got an OpenBSD machine to connect via ADSL and forward
packets, I am gradually upgrading my pf.conf. I am having trouble with this
configuration (ignore some obvious bugs related to table names where tables
are defined and the rules I have seen them).
At the moment I am w
12 matches
Mail list logo
