Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Bug in ipfw.c | Date | Tue, 20 Jan 1998 11:27:15 +1100 | From | Paul Russell <> |
| |
Hi bugsquishers,
I noticed this semantic change in DaveM's CVS tree before it got merged in, but didn't think it significant until someone (<mroos@hclub.ee>) pointed out that it's common to have the same interface address for multiple ppp interfaces.
Summary: Specifying an interface by address may not work as expected for recent (2.1.6x onwards?) kernels.
1) If an interface name and an interface address are both specified, the address is ignored.
2) If an interface address which matches no interface is specified, the rule will never match anything, even if an interface with that address is later upped.
3) If an interface address matching an interface is specified, then the rule is tied to that name, even if the address is changed.
4) If multiple interfaces exist with the same address, one is chosen at random (I think; whatever ip_dev_find returns).
#ifdef FREE_AD This is why my Generic IP Firewall Chains code doesn't used interface addresses... http://www.adelaide.net.au/~rustcorp/ipfwchains/ipfwchains.html #endif
I'll do a patch sometime this week if noone else does, Rusty. -- .sig lost in the mail.
| |