From owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 20 00:11:59 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19A4F16A4DA for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2006 00:11:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from solinym@gmail.com) Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.176]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99E4E43D49 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2006 00:11:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from solinym@gmail.com) Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id b29so571076pya for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 17:11:58 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=t/JvjFdDTdbAYKPlcStAmz/+a1yXISg106o+tz4cpNJY2ftPh61CdcE5YuWXEaev+E65w5RVMfuOHxCF9Qrtr1L9llHKrDz3Vy2FhUV9mKU5vUQsh2UZiwFCfailnmshXxrL/AYVX+29b2PEkDhVH6qYupnxZzFqmBnoYf7X5gE= Received: by 10.35.127.7 with SMTP id e7mr2005007pyn; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 17:11:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.34.13 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 17:11:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 19:11:56 -0500 From: "Travis H." To: "Rajkumar S" In-Reply-To: <64de5c8b0607190354r6fec30afh3e1d10c5463e31eb@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <64de5c8b0607181030h64d7d539r788ba7bbc6841e4d@mail.gmail.com> <200607181950.10304.max@love2party.net> <64de5c8b0607182320m6c9d0d9er5636de052e448bf3@mail.gmail.com> <64de5c8b0607190354r6fec30afh3e1d10c5463e31eb@mail.gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Program to add/delete a rule from pf X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter \(pf\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 00:11:59 -0000 On 7/19/06, Rajkumar S wrote: > Unless you expect to have several thousand rules like this concurrently, > the overhead of the sub-anchor evaluation isn't that terrible. Especially because of the state table. -- ``I am not a pessimist. To perceive evil where it exists is, in my opinion, a form of optimism.'' -- Roberto Rossellini http://www.lightconsulting.com/~travis/ -><- GPG fingerprint: 9D3F 395A DAC5 5CCC 9066 151D 0A6B 4098 0C55 1484