Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 11:49:33 +0300 From: "George Breahna" <freebsd@top-consulting.net> Cc: <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Bridging and IPFW Message-ID: <20050601084929.6B1C843D4C@mx1.FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <b7052e1e0506010142103f28de@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Yes and no. In any case, I have tried assigning them different rule numbers but it doesn't change anything. Second one still doesn't get looked at. George -----Original Message----- From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Dmitry Mityugov Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 11:43 AM To: George Breahna Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Bridging and IPFW On 6/1/05, George Breahna <freebsd@top-consulting.net> wrote: ... > According to what I have read, using ipfw2 I should now be able to > properly filter by MAC address..so I wrote up some rules! > > $IPFW 10 add allow ip from any to any MAC any 00:0E:A6:02:4D:A4 $IPFW > 10 add allow ip from any to any MAC 00:0E:A6:02:4D:A4 any Is it intentional that both rules have the same number, 10? -- Dmitry "We live less by imagination than despite it" - Rockwell Kent, "N by E" _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050601084929.6B1C843D4C>