В вт, 14/12/2004 в 17:56 +0100, Andre Oppermann пишет:
> > > > Yes, but is about "how netgraph interfere with ipfw" sometimes, netgraph > > > > filtering has nothing common with host filtering. > > > > > > Nontheless you need to call it from somewhere? > > > > Yes, If, for example, I do connection of two VPNs without accessiong > > them into host packet flow and want to firewall something inside. > > Hence you need a ng_ipfw node to plug in between. Should be easy for > Gleb to write one. Yes, exactly what I mean, but whole ipfw subsystem should support multiple chains or flows. > > > > > > 2. Plug firewall on any specific interface > > > > > > 3. Plug firewall on any network packet processing input/output > > > > > > (current) > > > > > > 4. Plug it into bridging code > > > > > > > > > > How do you represent this complexity in syntax and semantics? > > > > > > > > First what jump into my mind: > > > > > > > > flows management: > > > > ipfw flow add $customer1 iface fxp0 > > > > ipfw flow del $customer2 iface fxp0 > > > > ipfw flow set $customer1 iface fxp1 > > > > ipfw flow default $extrenal > > > > ipfw flow list > > > > > > > > changes rules for flow > > > > ipfw flow use $customer1 add ip from any to any > > > > ... > > > > > > Ok, this is a start. Now we are getting somewhere. > > > > > > A "flow" would be what Gleb calls a "chain"? > > > > Yes, exactly, just read Gleb's message. > > > > > > or as variant > > > > ipfw -F $customer1 add ip from any to any > > > > ... > > > > > > > > I think there can be better interface if think a bit about it. > > > > > > Great. Please do so. > > > > Probably better way to do > > > > ipfw flow set $custome1 add iface fxp0 del iface fxp1 ... etc > > for attaching multiple interfaces to single flow (or chain, does not > > matter) > > > > also > > > > ipfw flow add $dummy - to add not connected flow > > and > > ipfw flow default $dummy to make this flow system-default (instead of > > old) > > Ok, I see. > > Do you mind changing the term "flow" to something else? Because by > most accounts a flow is commonly a tcp session for example in Netflow > accounting. It would be very confusing to use it here with a total > different meaning. Term chain is not so bad, only objection - it has relation to Linux's ipchains but has a little common with it. > > Ok, I do not want to deep into details until I'll look code, but I guess > > it is possible to extend PFIL_HOOKS API without harming existing > > applications. > > It is not required to change PFIL_HOOKS in any way. Everything we need is > already in there. See Luigi's later emails as well. It just requires a > slightly different implementation approach. Greate -- Vladimir B. Grebenchikov [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
