On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Brian F. Feldman wrote: > If it will get ALL of you to give it a rest, how about: > per-rule logging limits
This has been needed for some time now. Also, please don't forget the oft-repeated request to have seperate accounting and logging counters so that you can zero one, but not the other. > logging limit raising > logging limit resetting I'd say that these are good knobs to have (I assume you're talking sysctl's?) but I'd also like to suggest a knob that allows you to toggle whether these can be changed at securelevel > 1, which knob is not resettable at securelevel > 1. I think that this would answer the needs of all parties concerned. > Which would all NOT affect the statistics? Oh good, you didn't forget. :) > I am, yes, suggesting I will implement it. Coolio. And inre the request to hear from the users of the code, I am one, have been for years, and deploy it in many different environments (including natd, basic security, etc.). These would be very welcome additions assuming that the performance hit is negligible. Thanks, Doug -- On account of being a democracy and run by the people, we are the only nation in the world that has to keep a government four years, no matter what it does. -- Will Rogers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message