Re: Layer-2 filtering in NPF
Christoph Badura <[email protected]> Wed, 9 Jul 2025 16:11:44 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.network |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Fri, Jul 04, 2025 at 09:01:56PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: > The rule that is now objected to looks like > > pass in proto udp to any port 11000-11002 > > (but not those numbers). Reading the man page, port-opts is > > port-opts = "port" ( port-num | port-from "-" port-to | var-name ) > > which indeed my line did not match, so I changed to The man page clearly states that it is a "non-formal BNF-like definition of the grammar". Looks to me like the non-formal part is ment to say that it doesn't have to explicitly state where whitespace is necessary. Obviously whitespace is necessary where tokens could otherwise not be separated. But a port range like 123-456 is easily tokenizable. Especially because negative port numbers don't exist. :-) I was expecting that bit of "non-formal BNF-like grammar" to mean that no whitespace is needed. Any other interpretation violates common sense and common usage. Fortunately, this has been fixed already. Altough I haven't seen a test case when I looked at the npftest.conf file an hour or so ago. --chris