Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 09:23:24 +0800 From: Ernie Luzar <luzar722@gmail.com> To: galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu Cc: Odhiambo Washington <odhiambo@gmail.com>, User Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>, Luzar <luzar722@gmail.com>, Shane Ambler <freebsd@shaneware.biz> Subject: Re: IPFilter & FreeBSD-10.1 Message-ID: <54C0510C.8070408@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51264.128.135.70.2.1421883154.squirrel@cosmo.uchicago.edu> References: <CAAdA2WMudfd0J9RP_3UL%2BEMC8Vh3Crks8c-6U5f7AQMBSR0XJQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOc73CCsrnqskLJKFbQH2W-EYH7yi=AXiSKw8jLYz0O35spJ5g@mail.gmail.com> <CAAdA2WOeiEv2opf4ZMDAf=LvC5TUCbC8%2BAeE0ecf7Ac%2B=jQ1-w@mail.gmail.com> <54BF7050.90605@ShaneWare.Biz> <CAAdA2WPr4jjdS3MiuNkuG2JQCA_LAaSndhe=cRxiSHVf9o_yRw@mail.gmail.com> <51264.128.135.70.2.1421883154.squirrel@cosmo.uchicago.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Valeri Galtsev wrote: > On Wed, January 21, 2015 3:29 am, Odhiambo Washington wrote: > >> Hi Shane, >> >> Where is the new syntax documented? Or I just have to 'man ipf'? I'd love >> to see a web discussion about it, which I obviously missed. >> >> Is there a sort of rule converter? :-) >> >> Thank you for mentioning this syntax thing. Must be the one that was >> biting >> me on 10.1 >> >> >> >> On 21 January 2015 at 12:24, Shane Ambler <FreeBSD@shaneware.biz> wrote: >> >> >>> On 21/01/2015 16:15, Odhiambo Washington wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Hi Ben, >>>> >>>> Thanks for this. I actually read this bit of it having been updated to >>>> version 5.1.2 in FreeBSD 10.0. >>>> >>>> However, my problem emanated from the fact that rules that I use on >>>> FreeBSD-8.4/9.3 simply could not work on 10.1 >>>> >>>> I simply carried the rules over, and did not compile a custom kernel on >>>> 10.1. I was believing that the module will be automatically loaded and >>>> rules would work. They didn't! Only 'ipf -D' would let connections to >>>> be >>>> made from LAN PCs to my gateway PC.. >>>> >>>> >>> I read a post in which someone had to copy the sources from 9.x to 10.x >>> >>>> and >>>> recompile in order to get it to work with the rules from 9.x >>>> >>>> >>> The update from 4.1.28->5.1.2 may include changes that requires >>> adjusting old rules to the new syntax. >>> >>> While going back to an older version can get your old settings to work >>> again it also removes any security fixes from the update. Updating your >>> ruleset would be a better solution. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> FreeBSD - the place to B...Software Developing >>> >>> Shane Ambler >>> >>> > > I wonder if anyone knows URl of official website of ipfilter. Both project > info on sourceforge (http://sourceforge.net/projects/ipfilter/) and > wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPFilter) point at the place > which apparently doesn't exist so you end up getting just front page of > the university: http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/ ... > > One does want to read the documentation to be able to keep using ipfilter > on FreBSD 10.x (as one did on FreeBSD 9.x in the past). And with syntax > changed, one does have to read Documentation (and here brilliant FreeBSD > documentation seems to be outdated...) > > Thanks a lot for your answers! > > Valeri > > > I moved my 8 production machines from 9.2 to 10.1 and my 9.2 IPFilter rules worked just fine on 10.1. It also has a private LAN and users can reach the public network. Matter of fact I have been using the same IPF rules since version 3.4. I find it hard to believe that as popular as IPFilter is no one else has voiced any problems about it. Your problem is a major show stopper and should be effecting ALL IPFilter users if it was a IPF software or 10.1 bug. IPFilter does not have any syntax chances. I pretty much use the IPF rule set as shown in the handbook. On the other hand PF does have major syntax differences between the old back version FreeBSD is running and the current version openbsd documentation shows. Maybe PF-IPF is what the previous poster was confused over. Rest assured, IPFiter does work on 10.1. Something changed on your system. Check all the basic IPF config files. Lan not reaching pubic network may mean your ipf.nat file is missing or codded wrong.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?54C0510C.8070408>