Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 13 Jan 2003 18:03:32 -0600
From:      Stephen Hilton <nospam@hiltonbsd.com>
To:        freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Cc:        barbish@a1poweruser.com
Subject:   Re: execution sequance of IPFW/IPFILTER when used together
Message-ID:  <20030113180332.20ad7484.nospam@hiltonbsd.com>
In-Reply-To: <MIEPLLIBMLEEABPDBIEGIEFODDAA.barbish@a1poweruser.com>
References:  <MIEPLLIBMLEEABPDBIEGIEFODDAA.barbish@a1poweruser.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 14:40:18 -0500
"JoeB" <barbish@a1poweruser.com> wrote:

> Informational post for the archives
> 
> From  lists-freebsd@silverwraith.com  who wrote
> We actually found it goes:
> 
> Internal private Net -> NIC -> IPF+NAT -> IPFW -> Public internet
> World
> 
> Public internet World -> IPF+NAT -> IPFW -> NIC -> Internal Private
> net
> 
> 
> Suffice to say, IPF+NAT always sees the packets first
> 
> This is way to use ipfilter to perform the nat function and ipfw
> dummynet

There was also some comments regarding this sequence changing 
depending on whether IPF or IPFW are compiled in the kernel or 
loaded as modules, does this have any affect on this rule ?

Regards,

Stephen Hilton
nospam@hiltonbsd.com

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030113180332.20ad7484.nospam>