From otim@mail.ru  Thu Apr 15 05:07:23 2010
Return-Path: <otim@mail.ru>
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E11A106566C
	for <bug-followup@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 05:07:23 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from otim@mail.ru)
Received: from fallback4.mail.ru (fallback4.mail.ru [94.100.176.42])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA1948FC0C
	for <bug-followup@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 05:07:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from f252.mail.ru (f252.mail.ru [217.69.128.177])
	by fallback4.mail.ru (mPOP.Fallback_MX) with ESMTP id C89781AFC6F6
	for <bug-followup@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 08:47:13 +0400 (MSD)
Received: from mail by f252.mail.ru with local 
	id 1O2Gyt-0004rB-00; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 08:47:11 +0400
Received: from [91.90.34.93] by win.mail.ru with HTTP;
	Thu, 15 Apr 2010 08:47:11 +0400
Message-Id: <E1O2Gyt-0004rB-00.otim-mail-ru@f252.mail.ru>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 08:47:11 +0400
From: Alex Novikov <otim@mail.ru>
Reply-To: Alex Novikov <otim@mail.ru>
To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org,
	otim@mail.ru
In-Reply-To: <20100413113658.GB97761@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: =?koi8-r?Q?Re=3A_kern/145462=3A_[netgraph]_[patch]_panic_kernel_when_ng=5Fipfw_send_ip_package_on_not_existing_netgraph_node?=
References: <20100413113658.GB97761@FreeBSD.org>

>Number:         145710
>Category:       kern
>Synopsis:       Re: kern/145462: [netgraph] [patch] panic kernel when ng_ipfw send ip package on not existing netgraph node
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    freebsd-ports-bugs
>State:          closed
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:  
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Thu Apr 15 05:10:01 UTC 2010
>Closed-Date:    Thu Apr 15 08:21:45 UTC 2010
>Last-Modified:  Thu Apr 15 08:21:45 UTC 2010
>Originator:     
>Release:        
>Organization:
>Environment:
>Description:
 Probably the code is correct. However means ipfw it is impossible to
 define has passed a package through netgraph or not. If the package
 returns in ipfw, it is difficult to find out a problem.

 Historically, netgraph node rejects packages transferred in a direction
 empty hook. It is impossible to change logic without the reasons.
 
 man ng_ipfw
 >Packets are sent out of the hook whose name equals the cookie value.
 >If no hook matches, packets are discarded.
 
>How-To-Repeat:
>Fix:
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
State-Changed-From-To: open->closed 
State-Changed-By: linimon 
State-Changed-When: Thu Apr 15 08:19:52 UTC 2010 
State-Changed-Why:  
Misfiled followup to kern/145462; content migrated. 


Responsible-Changed-From-To: gnats-admin->freebsd-ports-bugs 
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon 
Responsible-Changed-When: Thu Apr 15 08:19:52 UTC 2010 
Responsible-Changed-Why:  

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=145710 
>Unformatted:
