Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 16:36:52 +0300 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [TEST/REVIEW] ng_ipfw: node to glue together ipfw(4) andnetgraph(4) Message-ID: <20050120133652.GA18668@cell.sick.ru> In-Reply-To: <41EEBBC0.3040908@elischer.org> References: <20050117200610.GA90866@cell.sick.ru> <20050118183558.GA15150@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <41ED8D63.8090205@elischer.org> <20050119084526.GA5119@cell.sick.ru> <41EE2933.4090404@elischer.org> <20050119093608.GA5712@cell.sick.ru> <41EE3361.8D27FF5B@freebsd.org> <20050119123426.GA7825@cell.sick.ru> <41EEBBC0.3040908@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 11:57:53AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: J> >A> I like Julian's idea. And if you look at the mtag's the only thing that J> >A> is extracted is the rule number for divert, dummynet and netgraph (your J> >A> patch). Ideally this should be merged into one tag if possible and not J> >A> an architectual hack. J> > J> >When writing node, I was thinking about merging this into one tag. J> >However, I J> >expected negative response to this idea, from other developers. J> > J> >Anyone else agree that these tags should be merged? J> > J> J> which tags exactly? ng_ipfw_tag and dn_pkt_tag -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050120133652.GA18668>