Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
Julian Elischer wrote:
I do know it won't handle non contiguous masks well but as the
ipfw ABI code only accepts a network mask length instead of a
mask, there's not much that can be done.
I may suggest a later fix for that but it will break the ABI.
comments?
What yo
Julian Elischer wrote:
I do know it won't handle non contiguous masks well but as the
ipfw ABI code only accepts a network mask length instead of a
mask, there's not much that can be done.
I may suggest a later fix for that but it will break the ABI.
comments?
What you think about my patch?
-
Andre Oppermann wrote:
Max Laier wrote:
I don't like the implementation for this reason. It feels hackish to
me. What is the reason that you didn't duplicate the ethernet header
approach in ip_fw_pfil.c? Speed? Did you measure? It is certainly
easier to properly strip off the vlan header
Max Laier wrote:
On Friday 15 December 2006 22:20, Julian Elischer wrote:
Max, further to your comment..
Max Laier wrote:
On Monday 11 December 2006 23:58, Julian Elischer wrote:
Andre Oppermann wrote:
Julian Elischer wrote:
in ipfw layer 2 processing, the packet is passed to the firewall
a
Max Laier wrote:
I don't like the implementation for this reason. It feels hackish to me.
What is the reason that you didn't duplicate the ethernet header approach
in ip_fw_pfil.c? Speed? Did you measure? It is certainly easier to
properly strip off the vlan header in the pfil hook code an
On Friday 15 December 2006 22:20, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Max, further to your comment..
>
> Max Laier wrote:
> > On Monday 11 December 2006 23:58, Julian Elischer wrote:
> >> Andre Oppermann wrote:
> >>> Julian Elischer wrote:
> in ipfw layer 2 processing, the packet is passed to the firewal
Max, further to your comment..
Max Laier wrote:
On Monday 11 December 2006 23:58, Julian Elischer wrote:
Andre Oppermann wrote:
Julian Elischer wrote:
in ipfw layer 2 processing, the packet is passed to the firewall
as if it was a layer 3 IP packet but the ether header is also made
available.
Max Laier wrote:
On Monday 11 December 2006 23:58, Julian Elischer wrote:
Andre Oppermann wrote:
Julian Elischer wrote:
in ipfw layer 2 processing, the packet is passed to the firewall
as if it was a layer 3 IP packet but the ether header is also made
available.
I would like to add something
Max Laier wrote:
On Monday 11 December 2006 23:58, Julian Elischer wrote:
Andre Oppermann wrote:
Julian Elischer wrote:
in ipfw layer 2 processing, the packet is passed to the firewall
as if it was a layer 3 IP packet but the ether header is also made
available.
I would like to add something
On Monday 11 December 2006 23:58, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Andre Oppermann wrote:
> > Julian Elischer wrote:
> >> in ipfw layer 2 processing, the packet is passed to the firewall
> >> as if it was a layer 3 IP packet but the ether header is also made
> >> available.
> >>
> >> I would like to add s
Andre Oppermann wrote:
Julian Elischer wrote:
in ipfw layer 2 processing, the packet is passed to the firewall
as if it was a layer 3 IP packet but the ether header is also made
available.
I would like to add something similar in the case where a vlan tag
is also on the packet..
basically
Julian Elischer wrote:
in ipfw layer 2 processing, the packet is passed to the firewall
as if it was a layer 3 IP packet but the ether header is also made
available.
I would like to add something similar in the case where a vlan tag
is also on the packet..
basically I have a change where:
12 matches
Mail list logo
