Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 11:29:13 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: vadim_nuclight@mail.ru Cc: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/80642: [ipfw] [patch] ipfw small patch - new RULE OPTION Message-ID: <47E15B79.4060908@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <slrnfu1qau.21d2.vadim_nuclight@hostel.avtf.net> References: <200803122100.m2CL0t7V088955@freefall.freebsd.org> <slrnfthsg7.dgk.vadim_nuclight@hostel.avtf.net> <20080313094356.GA9219@tin.it> <47DF72A3.4030502@yandex.ru> <47DF78AF.400@elischer.org> <slrnfu1qau.21d2.vadim_nuclight@hostel.avtf.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Vadim Goncharov wrote: > Hi Julian Elischer! > > On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 01:09:19 -0700; Julian Elischer wrote about 'Re: kern/80642: [ipfw] [patch] ipfw small patch - new RULE OPTION': > >>> About Vadim's prepositions: >>> 1. tablearg: it's possible, but now we use u32 argument in >>> tables, but counterlimits are 64-bits values. First of we >>> should extend our current table argument to 64 bit. >> tables should be expanded to have different types of values.. >> 32 but ints >> IP addresses (currently I'm overlaying it on 32 bit ints) >> IPV6 addresses. >> skipto locations >> byte limits.. > > Are you talking about tablearg-values (data), or keys too? And does that count > only IP addrs and integers of different sizes, or strings too? In this case I'm talking about the args. table keys DO need to be expanded to handle ipv6 stuff and other such things, but that is not what we were discussing. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47E15B79.4060908>