Re: dragonflybsd's ipfw

Hi, I get below from another email this morning, the ipfw can add dynamic rules according to below email. *You can manually insert a state as below and the state will be maintain by ipfw itself.* *ipfw state add rulenum 100 udp 192.168.1.1:0 8.8.8.8:53

Re: dragonflybsd's ipfw

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014, at 06:11, bycn82 wrote: > *So **please DON'T make me a joker in front of all these big bosses. * > Don't worry. Your work is interesting and I encourage you to keep on hacking. Nobody is interested in making a fool out of anyone. If you come to any new conclusions please s

Re: dragonflybsd's ipfw

*So **please DON'T make me a joker in front of all these big bosses. * On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 8:10 PM, bycn82 wrote: > > *Hi Sato,* > > *I am also in this email list, If you have any question, You can ask,I > just double checked whether I made mistake or not, and I only found "**To > be honest,

Re: dragonflybsd's ipfw

*Hi Sato,* *I am also in this email list, If you have any question, You can ask,I just double checked whether I made mistake or not, and I only found "**To be honest, my rewrite version of ipfw2 is nothing special but it runs on this great system". So **please make me a joker in front of all these

Re: dragonflybsd's ipfw

hi ok. i will test it. but he said it is faster 2014-12-15 15:26 GMT+08:00 Luigi Rizzo : > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Sato Kentney > wrote: > > hi, > > his ipfw2 is ok for test now. > > http://www.dragonflydigest.com/2014/12/11/15220.html > > i meet some problem in testing so asking qesst

Re: dragonflybsd's ipfw

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Sato Kentney wrote: > hi, > his ipfw2 is ok for test now. > http://www.dragonflydigest.com/2014/12/11/15220.html > i meet some problem in testing so asking qesstion in drafonflybsd's email > list. > and i want to know is it correct that the ipfw2 is faster than ipf

Re: dragonflybsd's ipfw

hi, his ipfw2 is ok for test now. http://www.dragonflydigest.com/2014/12/11/15220.html i meet some problem in testing so asking qesstion in drafonflybsd's email list. and i want to know is it correct that the ipfw2 is faster than ipfw in freebsd? it is what he said. sure i will test it by myself. t

Re: dragonflybsd's ipfw

*that ipfw2 means "ipfw too", because it is originally from FreeBSD and totally not new create things, IMHO* *BTW Sato, I think the in-kernel NAT is almost there, I tested the basic NAT and it works in my lab environment.* On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Sato Kentney wrote: > i agree, > i am

Re: dragonflybsd's ipfw

i agree, i am not good in english as networking administor from Tokyo. but when i read the page, i see that the main idea is so call "modular design" and there is a long way to catch up the freebsd's ipfw anyway, i dont think it can compare to freebsd's ipfw, as Smith said their ipfw is the versio

Re: dragonflybsd's ipfw

On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 15:48:13 +0800, Sato Kentney wrote: > I saw a email in dragonflybsd email list, someone is doing this! > http://www.dragonflybsd.org/docs/ipfw2/ We've had 'ipfw2' for a very long while. I couldn't help wondering why DF wouldn't just import our many years of development and

dragonflybsd's ipfw

I saw a email in dragonflybsd email list, someone is doing this! http://www.dragonflybsd.org/docs/ipfw2/ -- ありがとう 佐藤柯德 Sato K. ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail t