From owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 8 13:23:13 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 374A616A468 for ; Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:23:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chrishome@austin.rr.com) Received: from smtpout10.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (smtpout10-04.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net [64.202.165.238]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DEFE113C45D for ; Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:23:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chrishome@austin.rr.com) Received: (qmail 26071 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2007 13:23:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (70.113.75.58) by smtpout10-04.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.238) with ESMTP; 08 Sep 2007 13:23:11 -0000 Message-ID: <46E2A20B.8010306@austin.rr.com> Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 08:22:19 -0500 From: "Chris Bowman (Home)" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: chris@korcett.com References: <46DF68EE.1010905@austin.rr.com> <20070906123417.GA95067@tin.it> <46E0146D.8060508@korcett.com> In-Reply-To: <46E0146D.8060508@korcett.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [6.x patchset] Ipfw nat and libalias modules X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 13:23:13 -0000 > >> On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 09:41:50PM -0500, Chris Bowman (Home) wrote: >> >>> I was recently testing the in kernel nat patch, which is an >>> absolutely wonderful addition in my opinion. I have however run >>> into one issue, when for example I do the following : >>> >>> ipfw nat 10 config ip 2.2.2.2 >>> >> [snip] >> >> Where did you get the 6.x patch? Did you find a tarball around or you >> backported the code from 7.x? >> >> In the first case, that patch is old and buggy, and AFAIK the bug you >> encountered was due to an uninitialized conditional variable. >> >> bye, >> P. >> >> >> I'm having a bit of trouble backporting 7.x to 6.x, 6.2 Release specifically. Before I continue down this road, in the name of not re-inventing the wheel twice, does anyone already have a current patch which will work on 6.2 ? Thank You! Chris Bowman