From owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 1 15:17:30 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92FA816A4CE for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 15:17:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from zibbi.icomtek.csir.co.za (zibbi.icomtek.csir.co.za [146.64.24.58]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F106643D6E for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 15:17:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhay@icomtek.csir.co.za) Received: from zibbi.icomtek.csir.co.za (localhost [127.0.0.1]) iB1FHHa8057385; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:17:17 +0200 (SAST) (envelope-from jhay@zibbi.icomtek.csir.co.za) Received: (from jhay@localhost)iB1FHGYT057384; Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:17:16 +0200 (SAST) (envelope-from jhay) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:17:16 +0200 From: John Hay To: "James R. Van Artsalen" Message-ID: <20041201151716.GA57183@zibbi.icomtek.csir.co.za> References: <41AC571E.2020503@jrv.org> <7261A3E8-42C2-11D9-AC2A-000A95A0BB90@bnc.net> <41ACBEDF.3020001@jrv.org> <200411302058.07224.max@love2party.net> <20041201095052.GA43515@zibbi.icomtek.csir.co.za> <41ADD688.4090807@jrv.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41ADD688.4090807@jrv.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: Max Laier cc: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.3 routing IPFW FWD'd packets? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:17:30 -0000 > >> > >>>>Packets sent to the directly reachable net 192.168.254/8 (rule 64000) > >>>>seem to work. Is it possible that packets are somehow being routed > >>>>after being FWD'd by IPFW? > >>>> > >>>> > >Just apply the patch in kern/71910 and you should be happy again. It works > >for me and a few others. > > > > > > > Thanks. But, if that is a problem then why is this code in ip_fastfwd.c > not also a problem? > Shouldn't this get the same change as kern/71910? > > #ifdef IPFIREWALL_FORWARD > if (fwd_tag) { > if (!in_localip(ip->ip_src) && > !in_localaddr(ip->ip_dst)) > dest.s_addr = ((struct sockaddr_in > *)(fwd_tag+1))->sin_addr.s_addr; > m_tag_delete(m, fwd_tag); > } > #endif /* IPFIREWALL_FORWARD */ It looks like it. It is probably not part of the patch because the original person did not use (and me neither) fast forwarding. John -- John Hay -- John.Hay@icomtek.csir.co.za / jhay@FreeBSD.org