In response to people who keep telling me to allow SMTP out: that has not and will not help since no outgoing packets are ever filtered.
A quick check to pflog reveals many such lines: Dec 02 02:37:42.368333 rule 5/(match) block in on dc0: \ 68.87.69.146.53 > 192.168.1.102.17175: 41421 NXDomain[|domain] (DF) Dec 02 02:37:55.356917 rule 5/(match) block in on dc0: \ 68.87.78.130.53 > 192.168.1.102.2207: 41421 NXDomain[|domain] (DF) Dec 02 02:37:55.691202 rule 5/(match) block in on dc0: \ 68.87.85.98.53 > 192.168.1.102.33981: 43339 0/1/0 (84) (DF) [tos 0x48] Dec 02 02:38:00.729462 rule 5/(match) block in on dc0: \ 68.87.69.146.53 > 192.168.1.102.30325: 43339 0/1/0 (84) (DF) Dec 02 02:38:05.719205 rule 5/(match) block in on dc0: \ 68.87.78.130.53 > 192.168.1.102.22741: 43339 0/1/0 (84) (DF) This is after opening udp 50 and 53. At the risk of being a broken record: I really just need to know what to let in since nothing is filtered going out. I hope I'm not misunderstanding something here. On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 8:48 PM, ropers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If I understand you correctly, then PF and sendmail are running on the > same host and you'd like to send emails from that host to somewhere > else. This means you have, in the first instance, to allow smtp > traffic OUT. (Once state is established, the conversation with the > other MTA will proceed anyway, and replies from the remote MTA will be > let through.) None of your quoted rules appear to allow smtp traffic > OUT, just in but that's irrelevant, for the said reason. Jason's rule > should sort you out. > > 'Hope I'm not mistaken/overlooking something, and 'hope this helps, > Cheers, > --ropers
