<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Status of FreeBSD-pf &quot;sticky-address&quot; issue in pfsense]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">According to the latest list of problems posted to the freebsd-pf mailing-list <a href="http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-pf/2011-December/006401.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow ugc">here</a>, the following issue ls listed as unresolved:</p>
<p dir="auto">kern/148290: [pf] "sticky-address" option of Packet Filter (PF) blocks connection</p>
<p dir="auto">However at redmine, <a href="http://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/337" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow ugc">bug #337</a> is listed as resolved.</p>
<p dir="auto">So, would it be safe to use the "sticky-address" option on 2.0-RELEASE systems?</p>
<p dir="auto">TIA</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netgate.com/topic/39755/status-of-freebsd-pf-sticky-address-issue-in-pfsense</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2026 18:18:47 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://forum.netgate.com/topic/39755.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2011 13:27:23 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Status of FreeBSD-pf &quot;sticky-address&quot; issue in pfsense on Thu, 08 Dec 2011 16:09:50 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">It's ok with multi-WAN, not ok with server load balancer.</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netgate.com/post/307806</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://forum.netgate.com/post/307806</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[cmb]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2011 16:09:50 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Status of FreeBSD-pf &quot;sticky-address&quot; issue in pfsense on Thu, 08 Dec 2011 15:53:32 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Could someone who's using "sticky" in a production system offer some feedback please?</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netgate.com/post/307802</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://forum.netgate.com/post/307802</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[dhatz]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2011 15:53:32 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>