Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 1 Aug 2014 07:20:43 -0600 (MDT)
From:      Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com>
To:        Dan Busarow <dan@buildingonline.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Future of pf / firewall in FreeBSD ? - does it have one ?
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.11.1408010716450.26876@wonkity.com>
In-Reply-To: <53DB9017.3000304@buildingonline.com>
References:  <53C706C9.6090506@com.jkkn.dk> <6326AB9D-C19A-434B-9681-380486C037E2@lastsummer.de> <53CB4736.90809@bluerosetech.com> <201407200939020335.0017641F@smtp.24cl.home> <788274E2-7D66-45D9-89F6-81E8C2615D14@lastsummer.de> <201407201230590265.00B479C4@smtp.24cl.home> <20140729103512.GC89995@FreeBSD.org> <53DA304E.6020105@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <20140731134147.GH2402@glebius.int.ru> <CALfReyerXQm6ehhtKXcJ9XD5fr=0LBShtD8EAUjd9p07xcQvjw@mail.gmail.com> <53DB9017.3000304@buildingonline.com>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Fri, 1 Aug 2014, Dan Busarow wrote:

>
> On 8/1/14, 1:39 AM, krad wrote:
>> I always found natting in ipfw rather awkward and harder than in pf.
>> Looking at the man page it doesnt seem to have changed. I should probably
>> give it another go though as it has been about 10 years now
>
> Couldn't be much easier than the way it works now
>
> e.g.
>
> firewall_enable="YES"
> firewall_type="OPEN"
> natd_enable="YES"
> natd_interface="em0"
> natd_flags="-s -m -u"
>
> All of the builtin rulesets know about NAT
>
> My home network has two internal nets each with it's own wifi AP and the 
> above handles it.
>
> natd_interface is your outside facing interface.

In pf, it is just an entry in the rules:

   nat on $ext_if from $internal_net to any -> ($ext_if)



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.11.1408010716450.26876>