Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 09:36:56 +0200 From: Casper Dik <Casper.Dik@Sun.COM> To: Darren Reed <darrenr@reed.wattle.id.au> Cc: gunther@aurora.regenstrief.org (Gunther Schadow), snap-users@kame.net, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, ipfilter@coombs.anu.edu.au, altq@csl.sony.co.jp Subject: Re: (KAME-snap 4587) The future of ALTQ, IPsec & IPFILTER playing together ... Message-ID: <200105020736.JAA16563@romulus.Holland.Sun.COM> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 02 May 2001 08:00:40 %2B1000." <200105012200.IAA22724@avalon.reed.wattle.id.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>BPF uses a byte-code language, like Java, to tell the >matching routine what bits to compare and return a "true or >false". i.e. you need to build things around it if you want >to use it for packet matching, etc. BPF doesn't seem to lend itself to "keeping state" either. It's a packet filtering language that has no provisions for keeping external state, AFAIK. Casper To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200105020736.JAA16563>