From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Thu Jul 23 15:56:53 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B90F9A8AFE for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 15:56:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65CF91B81 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 15:56:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id t6NFuriq054541 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 15:56:53 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 201590] Zerowindow packets escape stateful in-kernel NAT Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 15:56:53 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: g_amanakis@yahoo.com X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 15:56:53 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201590 --- Comment #9 from g_amanakis@yahoo.com --- (In reply to g_amanakis from comment #8) This poses another problem. Probably, commenting out the line will lead to these packets being rejected from the LAN, as they originated at the gateway. Which leads to the question whether net.inet.ip.fw.dyn_keepalive should be enabled on a gateway at the first place. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.