Auto Filter Reload causing weird error



  • The twice a day auto filter reload is throwing an error

    
    There were error(s) loading the rules: /tmp/rules.debug:376: syntax error - The line in question reads [376]: pass out route-to ( em0 X.Y.Z.33 ) from X.Y.Z.36 to !/ tracker 1000011161 keep state allow-opts label "let out anything from firewall host itself"
    @ 2018-02-05 12:30:51
    There were error(s) loading the rules: /tmp/rules.debug:376: syntax error - The line in question reads [376]: pass out route-to ( em0 X.Y.Z.33 ) from X.Y.Z.36 to !/ tracker 1000011161 keep state allow-opts label "let out anything from firewall host itself"
    @ 2018-02-06 00:31:42
    There were error(s) loading the rules: /tmp/rules.debug:376: syntax error - The line in question reads [376]: pass out route-to ( em0 X.Y.Z.33 ) from X.Y.Z.36 to !/ tracker 1000011161 keep state allow-opts label "let out anything from firewall host itself"
    @ 2018-02-06 12:30:54
    There were error(s) loading the rules: /tmp/rules.debug:376: syntax error - The line in question reads [376]: pass out route-to ( em0 X.Y.Z.33 ) from X.Y.Z.36 to !/ tracker 1000011161 keep state allow-opts label "let out anything from firewall host itself"
    @ 2018-02-07 00:30:33
    There were error(s) loading the rules: /tmp/rules.debug:376: syntax error - The line in question reads [376]: pass out route-to ( em0 X.Y.Z.33 ) from X.Y.Z.36 to !/ tracker 1000011161 keep state allow-opts label "let out anything from firewall host itself"
    @ 2018-02-07 12:30:31
    
    

    When I check the /tmp/rules.debug file at line 376, the rule is different:

    
    pass out  route-to ( em0 X.Y.Z.33 ) from X.Y.Z.36 to !X.Y.Z.32/29 tracker 1000011161 keep state allow-opts label "let out anything from firewall host itself"
    
    

    I don't know why the destination network isn't there in the error messages, but does exist in the file.

    A manual filter reload doesn't cause the same error.

    Current Setup: Dual WAN with failover, multiple virtual IPs on both, internal VLANs

    Any ideas?


Log in to reply