Re: Problems with IPFW and 5.3-BETA1

From: Andre Oppermann (andre_at_freebsd.org)
Date: 08/26/04

  • Next message: Hanspeter Roth: "Re: unloading ums and usb"
    Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 12:28:34 +0200
    To: Radek Kozlowski <radek@raadradd.com>
    
    

    Radek Kozlowski wrote:
    > I upgraded a remote dedicated server from 5.1 to 5.3-BETA1 today with a
    > step by step procedure described in /usr/src/Makefile and everything
    > went ok. Well, almost. I compiled the kernel (took the GENERIC conf
    > from 5.3, so options PFIL_HOOKS is already there) with:
    >
    > options IPFIREWALL
    > options IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE
    > options IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE_LIMIT=100
    >
    > put firewall_enable="YES", firewall_type="open" in rc.conf, rebooted and
    > locked myself out (world and kernel are in sync, before someone asks).
    > After I could access the box again I tried to see what was wrong:
    >
    > root@wesside:~# ipfw show
    > 00100 0 0 allow ip from any to any
    > 65535 0 0 deny ip from any to any
    > root@wesside:~# ping yahoo.com
    > PING yahoo.com (66.94.231.98): 56 data bytes
    > 64 bytes from 66.94.231.98: icmp_seq=0 ttl=58 time=3.324 ms
    > 64 bytes from 66.94.231.98: icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=5.138 ms
    > 64 bytes from 66.94.231.98: icmp_seq=2 ttl=58 time=3.671 ms
    > ^C
    > --- yahoo.com ping statistics ---
    > 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0% packet loss
    > round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 3.324/4.044/5.138/0.786 ms
    > root@wesside:~# ipfw show
    > 00100 0 0 allow ip from any to any
    > 65535 0 0 deny ip from any to any
    >
    > Why aren't the packet and byte counters increased?
    >
    > Since the firewall was totally unresponsive to any rulset changes I
    > removed above options from the kernel and decided to try the module
    > instead. With firewall_type="open" left in rc.conf (but firewall_enable
    > changed to "NO") I executed
    > `kldload /boot/kernel/ipfw.ko && sh /etc/rc.firewall ; sleep 100 ;
    > kldunload ipfw ; sleep 200 ; reboot` and locked myself out again. I
    > don't know what really happend and am still waiting for the reply from
    > the support team of the hosting company, but is it me or there's
    > something wrong with ipfw? Anyone else seeing this?

    There is no known problem with ipfw. I can only speculate but it might
    be that your /sbin/ipfw is out of sync with the kernel despite a make world.
    Other than that could provide the output of 'ifconfig -a'?

    -- 
    Andre
    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
    

  • Next message: Hanspeter Roth: "Re: unloading ums and usb"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: FreeBSD Gateway problems
      ... >speed connection for 3 years now, and I've just gotten it back. ... >Well all these other How-Tos I found on FreeBSDDiary.org told me all I needed ... To use ipfw adding these options to your kernel is a good place to start: ...
      (freebsd-questions)
    • Re: natd -redirect_port
      ... > into the kernel. ... > IPFW is delivered as an bootable module. ... > You need this in rc.conf to enable ipfw, ...
      (freebsd-questions)
    • Firewall and nmap
      ... I'm compiled a Kernel using the GENERIC config-file that ... So I flushed all rools for the firewall with ipfw flush (the still ... my kernel, ipfw -c list told me that this is true.) ... Anyway, nothing changes, all ports seem to be closed running nmap, ...
      (freebsd-questions)
    • Re: [PATCH] ng_tag - new netgraph node, please test (L7 filtering possibility)
      ... For simple using, however, you don't need to bother all that details - just remember magic number and where to place it, and it is now simple for use with ipfw tags. ... Currently the only analyzing node in FreeBSD src tree is ng_bpf, but it merely splits incoming packets in two streams, matched and not. ... There are reasons to this, as netgraph needs to be modular, and each node does a small thing, but does it well. ... For long time ng_bpf was used for another purposes in the kernel, and now, as new ipfw features appeared, ng_tag came up for easy integration. ...
      (freebsd-current)
    • Re: [PATCH] ng_tag - new netgraph node, please test (L7 filtering possibility)
      ... For simple using, however, you don't need to bother all that details - just remember magic number and where to place it, and it is now simple for use with ipfw tags. ... Currently the only analyzing node in FreeBSD src tree is ng_bpf, but it merely splits incoming packets in two streams, matched and not. ... There are reasons to this, as netgraph needs to be modular, and each node does a small thing, but does it well. ... For long time ng_bpf was used for another purposes in the kernel, and now, as new ipfw features appeared, ng_tag came up for easy integration. ...
      (freebsd-isp)