Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 20:26:54 +0200 From: Paolo Pisati <p.pisati@oltrelinux.com> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Efficient use of Dummynet pipes in IPFW Message-ID: <20050920182654.GA1384@tin.it> In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20050919085600.07f783f0@localhost> References: <6.2.3.4.2.20050918205708.08cff430@localhost> <20050918235659.B60185@xorpc.icir.org> <6.2.3.4.2.20050919010035.07dfc448@localhost> <20050919005932.B60737@xorpc.icir.org> <6.2.3.4.2.20050919085600.07f783f0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 09:11:33AM -0600, Brett Glass wrote: > I don't see it that way, because low level languages like assembler > are normally very efficient and highly granular. The underlying > opcode language of IPFW is low level for sure. But I would classify > IPFW's "language," as presented by the userland utility, as "high > level but limited." Sort of like the MS-DOS shell. just out of curiosity, what are the abilities that you miss in ipfw? (apart from the already mentioned problem) let me quote you again: > I would classify IPFW's "language," as presented by the userland > utility, as "high level but limited." what are the lowlevel bits that you miss? are you talking about the ability to directly manipulate data in a network packet or what? i'm very interested in this topic... -- Paolo
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050920182654.GA1384>