Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 10 Sep 2002 22:30:29 -0700
From:      Luigi Rizzo <>
To:        "Daniel C. Sobral" <>
Cc:        ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: ipfw2 vs. ipfw1 and 4.7
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>; from on Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 03:54:22PM -0300
References:  <> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 03:54:22PM -0300, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
> Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> > People,
> > now that the release of 4.7 is approaching, i would really appreciate
> > if you could give ipfw2 a try and see whether it breaks anything
> > in your rulesets. Also have a look at the manpage highlighting the
> > differences between ipfw1 and ipfw2 to see if your rulesets can be
> > simplified/made more efficient.
> I love ipfw2, even though the breakage of fwd caused me a huge headache. 

which reminds me, i have to fix the byte order in port numbers in
fwd actions...

> As a side note, the man page mentions that 32 sets are available, but 
> set 31 is illegal when I try to use it (and sometimes produce very weird 
> results indeed).

i guess i have to clarify the wording -- the manpage says

             Each rule is associated to a set_number in the range 0..31, with
             the latter reserved for the default rule.  Sets can be individu-

with wich i meant to say that you cannot use set 31 for anything else,
nor disable it.

What "weird results" were you seeing ?


To Unsubscribe: send mail to
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>