Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 08:31:20 +1000 (EST) From: Darren Reed <avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au> To: julian@whistle.com (Julian Elischer) Cc: sos@freebsd.org, jkh@time.cdrom.com, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ipfw vs ipfilter? Message-ID: <199608142231.PAA00154@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <32120A61.31DFF4F5@whistle.com> from "Julian Elischer" at Aug 14, 96 10:18:25 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In some mail from Julian Elischer, sie said: > > sos@freebsd.org wrote: > > > > In reply to Jordan K. Hubbard who wrote: > > > I'm all for it !! > > It leaves the question what to do with julian's redirect code ?? > > It shares much of the same "features" that ipfw does, and for all I care > > it can go as well.. Most of the features with it is now in ipfilter... > > > Actually it's archie's code, but we really need it.. > and I think I can make a good argument for giving the capacity to > use user-land agents for complicated packet processing. > Possibly we can add a "divert' to ipfilter and get darren to accept it > back.. I've been unwilling to join this conversation, but here I have to ask; what does "divert" do ? btw, on size, it is a very sensitive thing, as there are ongoing ideas and requirements for the code (not the least of which is getting it right and correct and bug-free) to match with the continually evolving field, which is (maybe now) just starting to mature. Some parts of IP Filter are "bare-bones" ish - I provide support in the filter for the person using it to supply their own hooks/patches to make fuller use of it. The .tar.gz for IP Filter includes several other programs, which whilst not directly a part of it, do I feel complement it (others also agree on this) and are thus included. Darren p.s. has anyone ever thought about having a licence which said "this code may not be GPL'd or put under any similar license" ? ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199608142231.PAA00154>