From swear@blarg.net  Fri Mar 15 18:06:40 2002
Return-Path: <swear@blarg.net>
Received: from lists.blarg.net (lists.blarg.net [206.124.128.17])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51F6C37B404
	for <FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2002 18:06:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18])
	by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1AC7BE6B
	for <FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2002 18:06:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([206.124.139.115])
	by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA13549
	for <FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2002 18:06:27 -0800
Received: (from jojo@localhost)
	by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.3) id g2G29CQ65838;
	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 18:09:12 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from swear@blarg.net)
Message-Id: <jh4rjhe01j.rjh@localhost.localdomain>
Date: 15 Mar 2002 18:09:12 -0800
From: "Gary W. Swearingen" <swear@blarg.net>
Reply-To: swear@blarg.net
To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: ipfw(8) needs explicit statement about non-IP packets
X-GNATS-Notify:

>Number:         35939
>Category:       docs
>Synopsis:       ipfw(8) needs explicit statement about non-IP packets
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       low
>Responsible:    freebsd-doc
>State:          closed
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:  
>Class:          change-request
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Fri Mar 15 18:10:01 PST 2002
>Closed-Date:    Sun Nov 17 15:39:49 PST 2002
>Last-Modified:  Sun Nov 17 15:39:49 PST 2002
>Originator:     Gary W. Swearingen
>Release:        FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE i386
>Organization:
none
>Environment:
n/a
================
>Description:

It would be helpful if ipfw explicitly stated the handling of non-IP
packets instead of just implying it by saying that ipfw(8) scans for
incoming and outgoing IP packets.  The implication is easily missed.

Apparently, this has been a source of confusion, especially given the
changing nature of the handling of non-IP packets.
================
>How-To-Repeat:
n/a
================
>Fix:

In the "Description" section, in the second paragraph, after the first
sentence, insert this sentence:

    (Non-IP packets, e.g., ARP or IPX, are not seen by ipfw(8) at all
    and so may be considered to be always passed by this firewall.)

From my brief conversation with Joost Bekkers I understand that this
has not always been the behavior and will not be when he's done, but
that's the way it is now, as confirmed by the bridge(8) page.
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
State-Changed-From-To: open->closed 
State-Changed-By: luigi 
State-Changed-When: Sun Nov 17 15:39:19 PST 2002 
State-Changed-Why:  
no more relevant, the ipfw manpage now explains clearly which packets 
are analysed by ipfw and where. 


http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=35939 
>Unformatted:
