Why not use netstat(1) and figure out for yourself if you'd otherwise be accepting traffic on any of those ports? Also, if this is non-essential traffic being dropped (and you aren't being DoS'd) there's no reason to care about it.
--david On 1/29/06, Dave Feustel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > PF works GREAT! > > Here is a list of ports that have had data sent to them today. > The 2nd number is the number of packets dropped. > Is there anything in the list that I should pay particular attention to? > > Thanks, > Dave Feustel > > 23 104 telnet 23/udp Telnet > 31 3 msg-auth 31/udp MSG Authentication > 34 4 # 34/udp Unassigned > 35 3 35/udp any private printer server > 50 8 re-mail-ck 50/udp Remote Mail Checking Protocol > 290 12 > 296 12 > 349 18 mftp 349/udp mftp > 376 3 nip 376/udp Amiga Envoy Network Inquiry Proto > 377 8 tnETOS 377/udp NEC Corporation > 380 1 is99s 380/udp TIA/EIA/IS-99 modem server > 487 5 saft 487/udp saft Simple Asynchronous File Transfer > 490 2 micom-pfs 490/udp micom-pfs > 495 2 intecourier 495/udp intecourier > 496 2 pim-rp-disc 496/udp PIM-RP-DISC > 525 5 timed 525/udp timeserver > 900 1 omginitialrefs 900/udp OMG Initial Refs > 906 8 > 921 5 > > -- > Lose, v., experience a loss, get rid of, "lose the weight" > Loose, adj., not tight, let go, free, "loose clothing"
