Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 08:34:37 +0100 From: Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Marko Zec <zec@icir.org>, Brett Glass <brett@lariat.net> Subject: Re: Multiple NAT router Message-ID: <20060725073436.GA7477@uk.tiscali.com> In-Reply-To: <44C5302D.1020807@elischer.org> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060721105813.0971ae90@lariat.net> <20060724090909.GB3412@uk.tiscali.com> <200607241609.30783.zec@icir.org> <20060724192419.GA5474@uk.tiscali.com> <44C5302D.1020807@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 01:40:13PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: > an ng_ip node :-) > I've considerred it. Then all the tools like 'netstat' and 'route' need modifying to talk to a netgraph socket, but in principle I don't see why it couldn't be done. ISTM there are a zillion userland-to-kernel and kernel-to-kernel communication interfaces: - ioctl - geom - cam - netgraph - vfs - sysctl - kmem - procfs - ... Perhaps they could all be replaced by netgraph?? Regards, Brian.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060725073436.GA7477>