Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 17:12:10 +0300 From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@ucb.crimea.ua> To: Remy Nonnenmacher <remy@synx.com> Cc: noor@NetVision.net.il, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ipfw behavior, is it normal? Message-ID: <19990328171210.A55135@relay.ucb.crimea.ua> In-Reply-To: <199903281409.QAA22122@rt2.synx.com>; from Remy Nonnenmacher on Sun, Mar 28, 1999 at 04:00:58PM %2B0200 References: <19990328164753.A50307@relay.ucb.crimea.ua> <199903281409.QAA22122@rt2.synx.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Mar 28, 1999 at 04:00:58PM +0200, Remy Nonnenmacher wrote: > On 28 Mar, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > Hi! > > > > You've screwed your rules up ;-) > > Rules 400 and 500 are `allow tcp', I suppose. > > Send us your _real_ rules first. > > > > I think these *ARE* the real rules. Anyway, 'IP' matches all packets.. > You think wrong. I mean: # ipfw add 00500 allow ip from any to 1.2.3.4 21 in via xl0 ipfw: error: only TCP and UDP protocols are valid with port specifications -- Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA of the ru@ucb.crimea.ua United Commercial Bank +380.652.247.647 Simferopol, Ukraine http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990328171210.A55135>