r289932 accidentally broke the rule skip calculation. The address family
argument to PF_ANEQ() is now important, and because it was set to 0 the macro
always evaluated to false.
This resulted in incorrect skip values, which in turn broke the rule
evaluations.
switch (aw1->type) {
case PF_ADDR_ADDRMASK:
case PF_ADDR_RANGE:
- if (PF_ANEQ(&aw1->v.a.addr, &aw2->v.a.addr, 0))
+ if (PF_ANEQ(&aw1->v.a.addr, &aw2->v.a.addr, AF_INET6))
return (1);
- if (PF_ANEQ(&aw1->v.a.mask, &aw2->v.a.mask, 0))
+ if (PF_ANEQ(&aw1->v.a.mask, &aw2->v.a.mask, AF_INET6))
return (1);
return (0);
case PF_ADDR_DYNIFTL: