[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: rdr syntax problem
- To: misc_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
- Subject: Re: rdr syntax problem
- From: Henning Brauer <lists-openbsd_(_at_)_bsws_(_dot_)_de>
- Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 11:04:09 +0200
- Mail-followup-to: misc_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 08:00:55PM -0400, William Culler wrote:
> I just noticed today that in ?current, built from sources yesterday, if
> I have a rdr rule specified like this:
> rdr on $Ext proto tcp from any to $Ext port 21 -> 192.168.1.50 port 21
> I get the no translation address with matching address family found
> error. This syntax used to work just fine.
> It works fine if I specify the rule like this:
> rdr on $Ext proto tcp from any to any port 21 -> 192.168.1.50 port 21
> Is this the way it is supposed to behave now or is it a bug?
probably a bug. I suspect $Ext is some interface? Well, I committed
something which _might_ fix that a few days ago. please update
/usr/src/sbin/pfctl/ to current and recompile pfctl and try again. if it
still fails, send me the problematic line and ifconfig $Ext output (replace
$Ext by the interface of course...)
Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.