From owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 24 12:35:56 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ipfw@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43C671065674; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 12:35:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists.br@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qw0-f54.google.com (mail-qw0-f54.google.com [209.85.216.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAE308FC24; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 12:35:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qwe4 with SMTP id 4so787516qwe.13 for ; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 05:35:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:mime-version :content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding :message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=IGi4CVHtoQumHUuogNkqLQI2iR0KvccF5+g4yzF5Q6w=; b=Yrn4B1hWU/8d0oit1jgZBdmtoPpFun/8NfL5YLNQtVQEAXeNVnfs/ITr7w7097f6v6 C6tuGVdegVDXWmH/0RmT9ACk//XBBVDmQ65T5SkMeoUyEySToSBJE7pK7oBPr6uKmBVY WmRRWRgzCzL3JWPF8ocUPaj6BjG3yLk6p+7Po= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=iGjOW2TQSBcWSRG1nIJbbLOlINY5cJpQ8hyEERrWZD1o7CtBI3VKK1+STelBER7qXH lrUd4DUblEDu3M0piH6ha+L7A2BaTEiX4pDIpjfFI6b1ASB/zyi/YtdvxMyE0/lBUoXK +zERgmE0rwzwHHzDovfZU7BbF+2eK7xBc/O4U= Received: by 10.229.230.4 with SMTP id jk4mr4941253qcb.174.1287922352218; Sun, 24 Oct 2010 05:12:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.86] ([187.39.29.5]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t35sm4828072qco.30.2010.10.24.05.12.29 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 24 Oct 2010 05:12:31 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Luiz Otavio O Souza In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 10:12:26 -0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <4CAA1E7B.1020107@freebsd.org> <4CAA45CC.8020304@freebsd.org> <4CAB8B35.7020703@freebsd.org> <4CACE7DE.9020106@freebsd.org> To: Eduardo Meyer X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Cc: Brandon Gooch , Patrick Tracanelli , ipfw@freebsd.org, Julian Elischer , Adrian Chadd Subject: Re: layer2 ipfw 'fwd' support X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 12:35:56 -0000 On Oct 22, 2010, at 9:49 AM, Eduardo Meyer wrote: >>>=20 >>=20 >> To be clear, are we getting to the point of having the capability in >> ipfw of doing something like this in pf: >>=20 >> ... >> pass in quick on $INT_IF route-to lo0 inet proto tcp from any to >> 127.0.0.1 port 3128 keep state >> ... >=20 > Yes, pretty much that. >=20 >>=20 >> ...thus allowing true, transparent proxying? >>=20 >> I really thought that this was possible already with ipfw :( I need = to >> do some more reading... >>=20 >> I would be very interested in obtaining details on your final setup, >> once everything is in place and fully functioning :) >=20 > Right. I'm still working on that. We have separated grat things > working perfectly. Now I want to glue it together. TPROXY with > FreeBSD's IP_BINDANY works perfectly based on L3 redirection with > IPFW. Now we can do IPFW L2 redirection/forwarding. So I want to be > able to use both togerther, TPROXY with IPFW L2 forwarding. >=20 > I am investigating the code, learning, trying some tests; since I am > not a developer, not good at hacking 3rd party code, I am trying some > dirty tricks. Unsucessfull right now but still investigating. Hi Eduardo, I've not tried yet the TPROXY setup, but something come up in my = thoughts about this... The ipfw rule i was using to test the L2 fwd was something like this: ipfw fwd 127.0.0.1,3128 tcp from not me to any 80 And this rule forwards all the 'output' traffic on the bridge interface = to lusca. nice ! But with TPROXY lusca will try to connect to http servers with the = client IP and therefore all this traffic will also match the ipfw fwd = rule ! so, we end up with a loop and the game is over... I'm not sure yet (as i'd not tested this) if this is the only problem or = how we can workaround this limitation. We probably need to 'tag' the lusca packets someway and skip the fwd = rule. Regards, Luiz From owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 25 11:07:03 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E56B10656A4 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 11:07:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00CBB8FC16 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 11:07:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o9PB723j088799 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 11:07:02 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id o9PB72lU088797 for freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 11:07:02 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 11:07:02 GMT Message-Id: <201010251107.o9PB72lU088797@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: gnats set sender to owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org using -f From: FreeBSD bugmaster To: freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: Current problem reports assigned to freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 11:07:03 -0000 Note: to view an individual PR, use: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=(number). The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users. These represent problem reports covering all versions including experimental development code and obsolete releases. S Tracker Resp. Description -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o kern/150798 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw2 fwd rule matches packets but does not do o kern/150141 ipfw [ipfw]: Not working kernel nat freeBSD 8.1 o kern/149572 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw kernel nat not working properly o kern/148928 ipfw [ipfw] Problem with loading of ipfw NAT rules during s o kern/148827 ipfw [ipfw] divert broken with in-kernel ipfw o kern/148689 ipfw [ipfw] antispoof wrongly triggers on link local IPv6 a o kern/148430 ipfw [ipfw] IPFW schedule delete broken. o kern/148157 ipfw [ipfw] IPFW in kernel nat BUG found in FreeBSD 8.1-PRE o conf/148144 ipfw [patch] add ipfw_nat support for rc.firewall simple ty o conf/148137 ipfw [ipfw] call order of natd and ipfw startup scripts o kern/148091 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw ipv6 handling broken. o kern/147720 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw dynamic rules and fwd o kern/145733 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] ipfw flaws with ipv6 fragments o kern/145305 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw problems, panics, data corruption, ipv6 so o kern/145167 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw nat does not follow its documentation o kern/144269 ipfw [ipfw] problem with ipfw tables o kern/144187 ipfw [ipfw] deadlock using multiple ipfw nat and multiple l o kern/143973 ipfw [ipfw] [panic] ipfw forward option causes kernel reboo o kern/143653 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] ipfw nat redirect_port "buf is too smal o kern/143621 ipfw [ipfw] [dummynet] [patch] dummynet and vnet use result o kern/143474 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw table contains the same address f kern/142951 ipfw [dummynet] using pipes&queues gives OUCH! pipe should o kern/139581 ipfw [ipfw] "ipfw pipe" not limiting bandwidth o kern/139226 ipfw [ipfw] install_state: entry already present, done o kern/137346 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw nat redirect_proto is broken o kern/137232 ipfw [ipfw] parser troubles o kern/136695 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] fwd reached after skipto in dynamic rul o kern/135476 ipfw [ipfw] IPFW table breaks after adding a large number o o bin/134975 ipfw [patch] ipfw(8) can't work with set in rule file. o kern/132553 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw doesn't understand ftp-data port o kern/131817 ipfw [ipfw] blocks layer2 packets that should not be blocke o kern/131601 ipfw [ipfw] [panic] 7-STABLE panic in nat_finalise (tcp=0) o kern/131558 ipfw [ipfw] Inconsistent "via" ipfw behavior o bin/130132 ipfw [patch] ipfw(8): no way to get mask from ipfw pipe sho o kern/129103 ipfw [ipfw] IPFW check state does not work =( o kern/129093 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw nat must not drop packets o kern/129036 ipfw [ipfw] 'ipfw fwd' does not change outgoing interface n o kern/128260 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] ipfw_divert damages IPv6 packets o kern/127230 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] Feature request to add UID and/or GID l o kern/127209 ipfw [ipfw] IPFW table become corrupted after many changes o bin/125370 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] increase a line buffer limit o conf/123119 ipfw [patch] rc script for ipfw does not handle IPv6 o kern/122963 ipfw [ipfw] tcpdump does not show packets redirected by 'ip o kern/122109 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw nat traceroute problem s kern/121807 ipfw [request] TCP and UDP port_table in ipfw o kern/121382 ipfw [dummynet] 6.3-RELEASE-p1 page fault in dummynet (corr o kern/121122 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] add support to ToS IP PRECEDENCE fields o kern/118993 ipfw [ipfw] page fault - probably it's a locking problem o bin/117214 ipfw ipfw(8) fwd with IPv6 treats input as IPv4 o kern/116009 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] Ignore errors when loading ruleset from o docs/113803 ipfw [patch] ipfw(8) - don't get bitten by the fwd rule o kern/112561 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw fwd does not work with some TCP packets o kern/105330 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] ipfw (dummynet) does not allow to set q o bin/104921 ipfw [patch] ipfw(8) sometimes treats ipv6 input as ipv4 (a o kern/104682 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] Some minor language consistency fixes a o kern/103454 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] [request] add a facility to modify DF b o kern/103328 ipfw [ipfw] [request] sugestions about ipfw table o kern/102471 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] add tos and dscp support o kern/98831 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw has UDP hickups o kern/97951 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] ipfw does not tie interface details to o kern/95084 ipfw [ipfw] [regression] [patch] IPFW2 ignores "recv/xmit/v o kern/93300 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw pipe lost packets o kern/91847 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw with vlanX as the device o kern/88659 ipfw [modules] ipfw and ip6fw do not work properly as modul o kern/87032 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] ipfw ioctl interface implementation o kern/86957 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] ipfw mac logging o bin/83046 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw2 error: "setup" is allowed for icmp, but s o kern/82724 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] [request] Add setnexthop and defaultrou s kern/80642 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] ipfw small patch - new RULE OPTION o bin/78785 ipfw [patch] ipfw(8) verbosity locks machine if /etc/rc.fir o kern/74104 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw2/1 conflict not detected or reported, manp o kern/73910 ipfw [ipfw] serious bug on forwarding of packets after NAT o kern/72987 ipfw [ipfw] ipfw/dummynet pipe/queue 'queue [BYTES]KBytes ( o kern/71366 ipfw [ipfw] "ipfw fwd" sometimes rewrites destination mac a o kern/69963 ipfw [ipfw] install_state warning about already existing en o kern/60719 ipfw [ipfw] Headerless fragments generate cryptic error mes o kern/55984 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] time based firewalling support for ipfw o kern/51274 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] ipfw2 create dynamic rules with parent o kern/48172 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] ipfw does not log size and flags o kern/46159 ipfw [ipfw] [patch] [request] ipfw dynamic rules lifetime f a kern/26534 ipfw [ipfw] Add an option to ipfw to log gid/uid of who cau 81 problems total. From owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 27 11:52:26 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 301A91065679 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2010 11:52:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ptyll@nitronet.pl) Received: from mail.nitronet.pl (smtp.nitronet.pl [195.90.106.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7D148FC17 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2010 11:52:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailnull by mail.nitronet.pl with virscan (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1PB453-0009XO-4y for freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org; Wed, 27 Oct 2010 13:22:09 +0200 Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 13:22:00 +0200 From: Pawel Tyll X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1097280104.20101027132200@nitronet.pl> To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Scanned: Nitronet.pl X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ptyll@nitronet.pl X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mail.nitronet.pl); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Subject: IPFW tables max X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 11:52:26 -0000 Hi list, Quick question: is there any reason NOT to increase net.inet.ip.fw.tables_max to, lets say, 65536? I have no intention of having that many tables, but ruleset will look cleaner if I'll be able to use table numbers related to VLAN IDs etc. Default limit of 128 tables seems a bit small, maybe there's some reason behind it that I don't see - hence the question :)