Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 14 Sep 2006 12:59:06 +0200
From:      =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sten_Daniel_S=F8rsdal?= <lists@wm-access.no>
To:        Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org>
Cc:        freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org, Ian FREISLICH <if@hetzner.co.za>
Subject:   Re: ipfw performance and random musings.
Message-ID:  <450935FA.3060105@wm-access.no>
In-Reply-To: <20060825064627.D6023@xorpc.icir.org>
References:  <rizzo@icir.org> <E1GGbiP-000DFG-1B@hetzner.co.za> <20060825064627.D6023@xorpc.icir.org>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 03:27:17PM +0200, Ian FREISLICH wrote:
>> Luigi Rizzo wrote:
>>> i am basically ok with this except, as i said, that there is
>>> no point in replicating the interface name i.e. why re0-re5
>>> instead of just re0-5 ? you just open up to possible mistakes
>>> and the need for extra code to check what happens when the user
>>> types re2-de5 (by mistake or intentionally).
>> Ok, it's just syntactic sugar anyway which doesn't really affect
>> implimentation anyway.
>>
>> So, to recap.  You will be fine with although I'm now leaning toward
>> "factor" in stead of "delta" but that will be a trivial change and
>> I'd like to change "@" to "indirect".
>>
>> skipto @ via vlan2-264 base 100 delta 100
>>
>> or as I'd prefer
>>
>> skipto indirect via vlan2-264 base 100 factor 100
>=20
> either way is fine with me.
>=20

How about;

skipto 1000:1000 via vlan2-264

??


--=20
Sten Daniel S=F8rsdal




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?450935FA.3060105>