Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 11:41:04 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org> Cc: Max Laier <max@love2party.net>, Milan Obuch <net@dino.sk>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Julian's netowrking challenge 2005 Message-ID: <42C199C0.1040704@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <20050628102728.GZ1283@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> References: <42C0DB3B.6000606@elischer.org> <20050628074640.GY1283@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <200506281139.17582.net@dino.sk> <200506281147.13299.max@love2party.net> <20050628102728.GZ1283@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jeremie Le Hen wrote: >>Wouldn't a more general approach be better. e.g. a way to "tag" a packet >>before it is sent to divert and a matching tag-lookup that can do further >>action. This would make it very easy to do all kinds of stuff that needs to >>know the original address instead of the translated one while avoiding code >>duplication. >> >> > >Having the possibility to tag a packet would be worth indeed. But I >think that Milan wants to bring network stack virtualization in >newer release of FreeBSD IIUC. This would be, IMO, a great improvement >of FreeBSD networking, although I'm pretty sure this would make Netgraph >people react a bit ;-). > > why? I think they are orthogonal. > > >>pf does something along these lines in case you are looking for references. >> >> > >Would it be possible to share this tag among pf and ipfw ? > >Regards, > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42C199C0.1040704>