[Bug 290177] PF - panicking after upgrade to 15.0-STABLE
[email protected] Thu, 16 Oct 2025 17:35:25 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.freebsd.devel.pf4freebsd |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]/bugzilla/> |
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=290177 --- Comment #10 from Marek Zarychta <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Kristof Provost from comment #9) In the past, rules: no rdr inet proto tcp from <white> to any port = smtp rdr pass inet proto tcp from any to any port = smtp -> 127.0.0.1 port 2525 used to work. Moreover, these rules are still mentioned in port mail/spamd/files/pkg-message.in [1]. I have also been using "no nat" "nat" rules for a long time, for example in a bit neglected and idling firewall, I still have sequences like: no nat on $int_if_1 from <reserved> to $aldona nat on $int_if_1 from any to $aldona -> $int_ip_1 It was 100% OK and working, old syntax. If it changed, please let me know how to rewrite the rules since neither: no rdr inet proto tcp from <white> to any port = smtp rdr pass inet proto tcp from any to any port = smtp -> 127.0.0.1 port 2525 nor rdr pass inet proto tcp from any to any port = smtp -> 127.0.0.1 port 2525 no rdr inet proto tcp from <white> to any port = smtp works. I have not tested "no nat" "nat" sequence recently, but in the past, it also worked flawlessly with 100% certainty. 1. https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/tree/mail/spamd/files/pkg-message.in?id=c16bc6bf10655d96b3005b59633eaa2367f50d94 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.