Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 15:29:13 -0800 From: Gordon Tetlow <gordont@gnf.org> To: Darren Reed <darrenr@reed.wattle.id.au> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Proposal regarding the RFC 3514 handling Message-ID: <20030403232913.GU69100@roark.gnf.org> In-Reply-To: <200304031312.XAA13954@avalon.reed.wattle.id.au> References: <20030402194821.C33692A8A5@canning.wemm.org> <200304031312.XAA13954@avalon.reed.wattle.id.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--iiZKCn1f/U0ES2iY Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:12:39PM +1000, Darren Reed wrote: > In some email I received from Peter Wemm, sie wrote: > [...] > > On the other hand, we have so much cruft in the ip input/output code pa= ths > > (2 or 3 different packet filter hooks etc), this is tiny by comparison. >=20 > Now that April 1 is far behind, I'll mention that I've been looking > at ways to amalgamate the mechanisms used by ipfw/ipfilter to address > this problem. Without being insulting, my 5 second grab on this is > that ipfw has grown like a tumour inside the ip stack with bits and > pieces hooked in here and there and everywhere (exageration.) That > is to say I think should be and can be better than they are. Not to mention that the last time I tried to build a kernel without INET, all the errors seemed to be a result of ipfw (iirc, this was a long time ago, it might be fixed now). -gordon --iiZKCn1f/U0ES2iY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE+jMPJRu2t9DV9ZfsRAnTFAKDLKX5/m4gKYaaTGyTW5QVkO2bTgwCeLdpK VymG9dpsGro7UXlWAaECVr8= =r5IJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --iiZKCn1f/U0ES2iY--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030403232913.GU69100>