Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 15:38:24 -0700 From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> To: "Jo B. Grasmo" <needle+ipfw@verloid.net> Cc: ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IPFW2 Message-ID: <20020726153824.G12623@iguana.icir.org> In-Reply-To: <20020727000831.A2252@resentment.verloid.net>; from needle%2Bipfw@verloid.net on Sat, Jul 27, 2002 at 12:08:31AM %2B0200 References: <20020725125346.A8987@dustpuppy.world-online.no> <20020725104256.B806@iguana.icir.org> <20020727000831.A2252@resentment.verloid.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jul 27, 2002 at 12:08:31AM +0200, Jo B. Grasmo wrote: ... > Quite, but also notice that "keep-state" is moved from after "setup" to so, keep-state is certainly meant to be the last opcode in a rule, i will update the userland and the kernel to make sure that this condition is verified. Other options can be in arbitrary order, and I think that trying to make the code print in a specified order is not worth pursuing, especially given that you can have OR blocks now. But it is all a matter of adding complexity to the userland part, so if there are volunteers I'll be glad to integrate the code in ipfw2.c cheers luigi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020726153824.G12623>