We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
from https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?topic=3670.msg12576#msg12576
It would be practical if we could tag the packets in ipfw, so we could skip mangling in pf. That would also solve #1166
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
change pfil order for ipfw, just like m0n0wall did. When ipfw forward…
83fd8a6
…s traffic, ignore route-to and rdr fixes for opnsense/core#1189 and opnsense/core#1166
patch available, test builds soon
Sorry, something went wrong.
Call for testing instructions here: https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?topic=3704.0
(captive portal) handle transparant proxy from within ipfw, bit of a …
0fb1cb1
…workaround for #1189
(captive portal) handle transparant proxy from within ipfw
782152f
PR: #1189 (cherry picked from commit 0fb1cb1) (cherry picked from commit e52b51f) (cherry picked from commit 98ed70d) (cherry picked from commit 0760c96)
fichtner
No branches or pull requests
from https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?topic=3670.msg12576#msg12576
It would be practical if we could tag the packets in ipfw, so we could skip mangling in pf. That would also solve #1166
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: