On 19 Dec 2005 21:41:02 -0800
"Jonathan Rogers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the first question still stands...
No, the protocol still stands. Its the only known quantity in
your question, its not going to change just for you. You want
the pf guys to answer questions, but you haven't provided any
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:03:11 -0500 (EST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I believe DNS lookups will ordinarily use UDP but may use TCP for larger
> transfers (like the 20 addresses returned for yahoo.com).
> It is my understanding (and experience) that DNS requires both UDP 53 and
> TCP 53 open thro
eric wrote:
On Mon, 2005-12-19 at 20:15:12 -0500, Elijah Savage proclaimed...
DNS is mainly udp traffic at least queries are because large DNS queries
can now spill over to TCP also. But mainly TCP is left for name server
to name server DNS transfers of domains.
Stop spreading these myths.
On Mon, 2005-12-19 at 20:15:12 -0500, Elijah Savage proclaimed...
> DNS is mainly udp traffic at least queries are because large DNS queries
> can now spill over to TCP also. But mainly TCP is left for name server
> to name server DNS transfers of domains.
Stop spreading these myths.
TCP is us
Jonathan Rogers wrote:
DNS primarily goes over UDP. You need to open up udp/53.
Again, I opened up both TCP and UDP ports, but the effect was the same.
In any case, refer back to the original posting - the blocked packet
from the tcpdump shown is clearly of a TCP packet (it would say "UDP"
a
On 19 Dec 2005 21:41:02 -0800, Jonathan Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In any case, refer back to the original posting - the blocked packet
> from the tcpdump shown is clearly of a TCP packet (it would say "UDP"
> at the end otherwise).
It doesn't say S(YN), and I don't know what label does.
Jonathan Rogers wrote:
My new OpenBSD 3.8/pf firewall setup seems now to mostly be doing what
it's supposed to. One lingering problem, though, that I just can't find
the source of. I'm getting occasional log messages like this (standard
tcpdump format):
Dec 18 05:55:43 rule 33/(match) block in o
Jonathan Rogers wrote:
My new OpenBSD 3.8/pf firewall setup seems now to mostly be doing what
it's supposed to. One lingering problem, though, that I just can't find
the source of. I'm getting occasional log messages like this (standard
tcpdump format):
Dec 18 05:55:43 rule 33/(match) block in o
I believe DNS lookups will ordinarily use UDP but may use TCP for larger
transfers (like the 20 addresses returned for yahoo.com).
It is my understanding (and experience) that DNS requires both UDP 53 and
TCP 53 open through a firewall to avoid problems.
Mike
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, ed wrote:
Yup. TCP is only when resolving multiple requests (e.g. when running
netstat -a)
--
http://www.lightconsulting.com/~travis/ -><- You are free... to do as
we tell you!
"My love for mathematics is like 1/x as x approaches 0."
GPG fingerprint: 50A1 15C5 A9DE 23B9 ED98 C93E 38E9 204A 94C2 641B
>DNS primarily goes over UDP. You need to open up udp/53.
Again, I opened up both TCP and UDP ports, but the effect was the same.
In any case, refer back to the original posting - the blocked packet
from the tcpdump shown is clearly of a TCP packet (it would say "UDP"
at the end otherwise).
the
>Would it be because dns sometimes talks UDP? (I forget the details.)
Thanks - that was my first thought, but (a) the blocked packets show up
as TCP, not UDP, and (b) I still had the problem even when I added UDP
explicitly to the pass rule I show.
So I'm still stuck.
/jon/
12 matches
Mail list logo
