From owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 28 13:55:17 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E9D2738 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 13:55:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB9A0F48 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 13:55:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WTXFP-0002Of-2C for freebsd-pf@freebsd.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:55:03 +0100 Received: from c-98-212-192-10.hsd1.il.comcast.net ([98.212.192.10]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:55:03 +0100 Received: from njriley by c-98-212-192-10.hsd1.il.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:55:03 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org From: Nicholas Riley Subject: Re: pf + NAT + ICMP issues? Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 08:53:49 -0500 Organization: University of Illinois College of Medicine at Urbana-Champaign Lines: 12 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-98-212-192-10.hsd1.il.comcast.net User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter \(pf\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 13:55:17 -0000 In article , Daniel Engberg wrote: > Tried that and no go, actually allowing all types of ICMP doesn't seem > to help either so I guess it might be something within pf? Does anyone > have this working on HEAD? Have you had any luck with this since? I just tried pf on HEAD and am running into NAT breakage, including the "first ping lost" issue you documented. natd/ipfw works fine on the same machine. -- Nicholas Riley