From owner-freebsd-current Fri Jan 7 10:12:43 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from info.iet.unipi.it (info.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.184]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 923E1157D6 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2000 10:12:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from luigi@info.iet.unipi.it) Received: (from luigi@localhost) by info.iet.unipi.it (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA05606; Fri, 7 Jan 2000 19:13:00 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from luigi) From: Luigi Rizzo Message-Id: <200001071813.TAA05606@info.iet.unipi.it> Subject: Re: ipfw optimizations In-Reply-To: <6724.947268571@critter.freebsd.dk> from Poul-Henning Kamp at "Jan 7, 2000 07:09:31 pm" To: Poul-Henning Kamp Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 19:13:00 +0100 (CET) Cc: Patrick Bihan-Faou , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL61 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I still think we should split the current "one huge list of rules" > into several lists: > Two lists per interface: > one list of rules for inbound packets > one list of rules for outbound packets > > Two lists for the IP stack: > one list of rules for incoming packets > one list of rules for outgoing packets > > One list for forwarding of packets. aren't these three classes combined in some H-shaped way ? cheers luigi -----------------------------------+------------------------------------- Luigi RIZZO, luigi@iet.unipi.it . Dip. di Ing. dell'Informazione http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/ . Universita` di Pisa TEL/FAX: +39-050-568.533/522 . via Diotisalvi 2, 56126 PISA (Italy) Mobile +39-347-0373137 -----------------------------------+------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message