Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:40:34 -0800
From:      "Li, Qing" <qing.li@bluecoat.com>
To:        "Luigi Rizzo" <rizzo@iet.unipi.it>, "Hajimu UMEMOTO" <ume@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, David Horn <dhorn2000@gmail.com>, freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Subject:   RE: Unified rc.firewall ipfw me/me6 issue
Message-ID:  <B583FBF374231F4A89607B4D08578A4306488F99@bcs-mail03.internal.cacheflow.com>
In-Reply-To: <20100110185232.GA27907@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
References:  <25ff90d60912162320y286e37a0ufeb64397716d8c18@mail.gmail.com><ygek4wmyp3j.wl%ume@mahoroba.org><25ff90d60912180612y2b1f64fbw34b4d7f648762087@mail.gmail.com><yged42c4770.wl%ume@mahoroba.org><25ff90d61001021736p7b695197q104f4a7769b51b71@mail.gmail.com><yge8wc5u872.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> <20100110185232.GA27907@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>=20
> We only need one 'me' option that matches v4 and v6, because the
> other two can be implemented as 'ip4 me' and 'ip6 me' at no extra
> cost (the code for 'me' only scans the list corresponding to the
> actual address family of the packet).  I would actually vote for
> removing the 'me6' microinstruction from the kernel, and implement
> it in /sbin/ipfw by generating 'ip6 me'.
>=20

	I agree with Luigi.

	-- Qing





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B583FBF374231F4A89607B4D08578A4306488F99>