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: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.11.1408010716450.26876>