Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 22:30:43 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> To: Oleg Bulyzhin <oleg@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet ip_fw.h ip_fw2.c src/sbin/ipfw ipfw.8 ipfw2.c Message-ID: <4474C273.7030801@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20060524190726.GB62483@lath.rinet.ru> References: <200605241309.k4OD9tex003002@repoman.freebsd.org> <20060524131602.GA57006@lath.rinet.ru> <44747A4C.9090800@freebsd.org> <20060524190726.GB62483@lath.rinet.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Oleg Bulyzhin wrote: > On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 05:22:52PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: >> Oleg Bulyzhin wrote: >>> On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 01:09:55PM +0000, Oleg Bulyzhin wrote: >>>> oleg 2006-05-24 13:09:55 UTC >>>> >>>> FreeBSD src repository >>>> >>>> Modified files: >>>> sys/netinet ip_fw.h ip_fw2.c >>>> sbin/ipfw ipfw.8 ipfw2.c >>>> Log: >>>> Implement internal (i.e. inside kernel) packet tagging using >>>> mbuf_tags(9). >>>> Since tags are kept while packet resides in kernelspace, it's possible >>>> to >>>> use other kernel facilities (like netgraph nodes) for altering those >>>> tags. >>>> >>>> Submitted by: Andrey Elsukov <bu7cher at yandex dot ru> >>>> Submitted by: Vadim Goncharov <vadimnuclight at tpu dot ru> >>>> Approved by: glebius (mentor) >>>> Idea from: OpenBSD PF >>>> MFC after: 1 month >>>> >>>> Revision Changes Path >>>> 1.188 +61 -1 src/sbin/ipfw/ipfw.8 >>>> 1.89 +72 -8 src/sbin/ipfw/ipfw2.c >>>> 1.106 +6 -0 src/sys/netinet/ip_fw.h >>>> 1.132 +57 -1 src/sys/netinet/ip_fw2.c >>> Examples of ipfw rules syntax: >>> count tag 100 ip from any to any >>> allow untag 10 ip from any to any tagged 10 >> Does this accept the packet and untag it at the same time? Wouldn't >> it make more sense to have [tag|untag] as its own operators like >> [allow|deny]? >> >>> allow tag 200 ip from any to any not tagged 0-65535 >>> >> -- >> Andre > > It was just syntax example, of course those rules are useless. Main idea > of tags: you can alter them outside ipfw so it's possible to do > policy routing/filtering/etc decisions outside ipfw. I'm perfectly fine with tags. My question was just about the ipfw rule syntax for tagging. See my email to Andrey for a more detailed rant. -- Andre
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4474C273.7030801>