Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 3 Aug 2016 21:03:50 +0300
From:      "Andrey V. Elsukov" <ae@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>, Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au>
Cc:        lev@freebsd.org, "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: IPFW: more "orthogonal? state operations, push into 11?
Message-ID:  <46d5cfde-c4ac-ebd0-3c13-2759037621f3@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <64d6bdea-fa32-f16f-2fdd-abd33d54d04e@freebsd.org>
References:  <9229d4f7-8466-57b0-c954-117736102bd7@FreeBSD.org> <5755F0D3.9060909@FreeBSD.org> <5759DB79.10205@FreeBSD.org> <3d09497c-136c-e217-154c-ba00e6879c6f@freebsd.org> <20160616005016.A15883@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <d7bef617-70a4-f761-7d09-9413eb720b11@freebsd.org> <64d6bdea-fa32-f16f-2fdd-abd33d54d04e@freebsd.org>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--pSiLNJdf6wFEA8TNOA1npFEEVgxaV3ou0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="WPtlGaJ4pVrUeE4ufWDl39GR8Nr8ux2EL"
From: "Andrey V. Elsukov" <ae@FreeBSD.org>
To: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>, Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au>
Cc: lev@freebsd.org, "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@freebsd.org>,
 freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <46d5cfde-c4ac-ebd0-3c13-2759037621f3@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: IPFW: more "orthogonal? state operations, push into 11?
References: <9229d4f7-8466-57b0-c954-117736102bd7@FreeBSD.org>
 <5755F0D3.9060909@FreeBSD.org> <5759DB79.10205@FreeBSD.org>
 <3d09497c-136c-e217-154c-ba00e6879c6f@freebsd.org>
 <20160616005016.A15883@sola.nimnet.asn.au>
 <d7bef617-70a4-f761-7d09-9413eb720b11@freebsd.org>
 <64d6bdea-fa32-f16f-2fdd-abd33d54d04e@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <64d6bdea-fa32-f16f-2fdd-abd33d54d04e@freebsd.org>

--WPtlGaJ4pVrUeE4ufWDl39GR8Nr8ux2EL
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 02.08.16 09:47, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Do we have any movement on these improvements?
> even similar functionality by different names is ok.
>=20
> 1/ ability to use keep-state without an implicit check-state. <--- most=

> important for me. (store-state)?
> 2/ ability to keep-state without actually doing it <---- less important=

> for me.


So, if there are nobody against, I plan to commit this part in a several
days.

> 3/ multiple state tables? this was discussed and I thought I saw patche=
s
> but I haven't seen it going in,  <-- super luxurious

AFAIR, this was a part of "per-interface firewall" patch from eri@ and I
think it is mostly outdated now, because in head/ we did very complex
changes in ipfw.

--=20
WBR, Andrey V. Elsukov


--WPtlGaJ4pVrUeE4ufWDl39GR8Nr8ux2EL--

--pSiLNJdf6wFEA8TNOA1npFEEVgxaV3ou0
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEsBAEBCAAWBQJXojIHDxxhZUBmcmVlYnNkLm9yZwAKCRABxeoEEMihei60B/9T
ABGo4jcYrIZvwEnZCJye+Loa831xxVTQOBfzsjypShw6Hu3EdaurWEiI86FrEl1W
0XSbHkNaDSz8IplDSkpYDpUDCj55FZvYefimyzr38dB05Rlr5X3xQmdoT/yBkagx
/7jpNXuv+NLANL/4FFTy0tjgNnMg37Vr+YUcuJ/6DT0y6xBzpQ6cyR29dA7o8H09
P19+MmYI00Y1gZrQJC8nRgxEsCmSwCy6FJ5CujWnGw46qhUA8T4LCECzi46lCGqD
gHBmrXrlH6kSb6DAkuIW8FuOdaxa5BbCgtCIHIuy1isTzsoDWXEEs/qeXtmEpGmc
Bz0YF203mbKfnJe7JvgY
=n5sT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--pSiLNJdf6wFEA8TNOA1npFEEVgxaV3ou0--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?46d5cfde-c4ac-ebd0-3c13-2759037621f3>