Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 18:03:29 +0100 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet ip_fw.c ip_fw.h src/sbin/ipfw ipfw.8 ipfw.c Message-ID: <52175.982083809@critter> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 13 Feb 2001 08:55:40 PST." <3A89670C.82B8DAA9@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <3A89670C.82B8DAA9@elischer.org>, Julian Elischer writes: >> It would be more elegant to have multiple lists of ipfw rules: >> One input list per interface >> One output list per interface >> One list for packets being forwarded >> One list for packets arriving locally >> One list for packets originating locally >> >> And it would be trivial to implement this in a backwards compatible >> fashion, but I guess that is bikeshed coloring material so I'll >> just leave that thought to fester here in case anyone feels like >> looking at it.... > >I agree, though it is possible to break the single list in to these using >skipto rules.. (we did that at whistle.) the first rule immediatly jumped >to rule 8000 or something if it was an external incoming packet. > >It's not perfect but it does aproximate what you are talking about.. It is the "aproximate" that I'm targeting here :-) -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?52175.982083809>