From owner-freebsd-net  Wed May 20 05:33:20 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA28527
          for freebsd-net-outgoing; Wed, 20 May 1998 05:33:20 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from labinfo.iet.unipi.it (labinfo.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.5])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id FAA28506
          for <net@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 20 May 1998 05:33:12 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it)
Received: from localhost (luigi@localhost) by labinfo.iet.unipi.it (8.6.5/8.6.5) id MAA11746; Wed, 20 May 1998 12:46:26 +0200
From: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
Message-Id: <199805201046.MAA11746@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
Subject: Re: struct ifnet handling...
To: eivind@yes.no (Eivind Eklund)
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 12:46:26 +0200 (MET DST)
Cc: julian@whistle.com, kjc@csl.sony.co.jp, net@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <19980520133843.32113@follo.net> from "Eivind Eklund" at May 20, 98 01:38:24 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

> > I think it is only a matter of naming (witnessed by the "rule list"
> > name used by cisco) and perhaps of having some default demux/mux of
> > 'chains' (but that could give a loss of flexibility for no real
> > performance advantage).
> 
> I still don't see how you're loosing flexibility, even if you should
> decide to provide this interface as an alternate interface for the
> users.

i was/am under the impression that you  don't want to insert "SKIPTO"
instructions in your filter, but rather provide fixes paths for the
rules. if you provide SKIPTO instructions, then your proposal is a
superset of what I and presumably Julian are talking about.

	cheers
	luigi

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message