> Trevor Talbot wrote ...
>
> I did some playing around and discovered something. It seems that
> someone forgot to fully ALTQify tun0. Specifically, select()
> always returns read-ready if there's any data in the internal queue,
> whether ALTQ's discipline is ready to release it or not.
>
>
I'm running PF as a routing firewall without NAT.
Unless I'm mistaken, ftp-proxy should work in either direction without
having the reverse patch in this situation. Am I wrong in this
assumption?
It works fine for local ftp clients, but I can't seem to get it to work
in the other direction.
{2600}---
|--- /29
||
fxp0 { OpenBSD } fxp1 --|
{ Bridge }|
eth0 { Cisco 2514 } eth1 --|
Nevermind, I got it. Had to add some rules to pass traffic from the
external interface to 127.0.0.1
On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 13:22, Nick Lomonte wrote:
> I'm running PF as a routing firewall without NAT.
>
> Unless I'm mistaken, ftp-proxy should work in either direction without
> having the revers
Forwarding to PF list as well.
--- Begin Message ---
Title: RE: OpenBSD Bridge setup with OSPF routed networks behind it - W0ES-
I disabled pf and then re-enabled it and now my config works fine - after
I ping the Bridge External Address from a host behind the /28
I did notice this in th
Hi all.
I am involved with a project to provide load balanced, redundent links
to the internet. We have been approached by the holder's of Patent
6,493,341 indicating that we are in violation of their patent. It
appears that the patent covers identifying a SYN packet and picking a
line over whi
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 05:06:17PM -0500, Charles Steaderman wrote:
> Hi all.
> I am involved with a project to provide load balanced, redundent links
> to the internet. We have been approached by the holder's of Patent
> 6,493,341 indicating that we are in violation of their patent. It
> appear
On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Henning Brauer wrote:
> would help if we had access to the patent.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,493,341.WKU.&OS=PN/6,493,341&RS=PN/6,493,341
On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 12:30:10AM +0200, Wouter Clarie wrote:
>
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Henning Brauer wrote:
>
> > would help if we had access to the patent.
>
> http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,493,341.WKU.&O
On Monday, Jun 9, 2003, at 02:14 US/Pacific, Primož Gabrijelčič wrote:
Trevor Talbot wrote ...
As I don't have a PPPoE setup to work with, I did my own testing with
just tun0, and saw the spin effect. Below is a patch for if_tun.c,
which fixed the problem I observed. I'd like to know if it fixe
I am cross-posting this to openbsd-pf because I am
at a complete loss and don't know where the problem lies.
I have a OpenBSD ipsec vpn setup between several
node sites and one central site. For the most part it seems they are setup
fine (isakmpd, pf etc). I can ping, I can do all sorts o
11 matches
Mail list logo
