tom at tomjudge.com
Wed Aug 15 17:07:18 PDT 2007
Toomas Pelberg wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 17:13 -0700, Jon Simola wrote:
>> On 8/14/07, Toomas Pelberg <toomas at detalem.cq.hk> wrote:
>>> pfctl man page says:
>>> -i interface
>>> Restrict the operation to the given interface.
>>> ..what exactly is meant under the word "operation" ?
>> This would be one of those things that is obvious once you've seen an example
>> and thought about it for a while.
>> $sudo pfctl -si |grep -A1 State
>> State Table Total Rate
>> current entries 34056
>> $sudo pfctl -i vlan170 -ss |wc -l
> So -i only works in combination with -s ? If so, i think it should be
> in the man page.
I have not tested this but what happens if you try to load the following
rule set with the pfctl -i lo1 -f rules
pass on lo0 all
block on lo1 all
If the output of 'pfctl -srules' shows both rules then the -i flag has
no effect on the operation of the -f flag.
>> In this case, only show states bound to the vlan170 interface.
>>> My problem: I want to load a different ruleset for each interface
>>> ( jails ) and not care about what's in the ruleset as long as it doesn't
>>> affect anything outside the jail ( which is bound to a specific ip on a
>>> seperate interface )
>> You probably want to look into anchors.
> While I can use an anchor to limit to the interface, it's an rather ugly
> Care to show an elegant solution how to anchor unspecified number of
> user rules?
> I could just as well pass over the supplied ruleset with an perl script
> that skips
> any rules not starting with pass/block in/out on jail_interface.
> pfctl -i & -f combo would've been great for this purpose.
> freebsd-pf at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-pf-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-pf