From owner-freebsd-current  Mon Apr  1 02:27:35 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id CAA15151
          for current-outgoing; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 02:27:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tfs.com (tfs.com [140.145.250.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA15145
          for <current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 02:27:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from critter.tfs.com by tfs.com (smail3.1.28.1) with SMTP
	id m0u3gpd-0003vnC; Mon, 1 Apr 96 02:27 PST
Received: from localhost.tfs.com (localhost.tfs.com [127.0.0.1]) by critter.tfs.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA15280; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 10:27:20 GMT
X-Authentication-Warning: critter.tfs.com: Host localhost.tfs.com didn't use HELO protocol
To: "Frank ten Wolde" <franky@pinewood.nl>
cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: [Q] Semantics of 'established' in ipfw tcp 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 01 Apr 1996 10:20:05 +0100."
             <9604011020.ZM20909@pwood1.pinewood.nl> 
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 10:27:18 +0000
Message-ID: <15278.828354438@critter.tfs.com>
From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.tfs.com>
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> I would like to know other people's reactions to the current semantics of
> the 'established' keyword for TCP connections in the 2.2-960323-SNAPSHOT
> implementation of the ipfw in the kernel. 

> The problem is in the 'ACK-set' keyword, which is *not* available at this
> moment...

Yes indeed it is available.  You can specify any combination of flags you
want.

> Your opinions please... :-)

I got side tracked by some real-world problems but I'm on my way back to
the IPFW stuff.

Please send any suggestions you have.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp           | phk@FreeBSD.ORG       FreeBSD Core-team.
http://www.freebsd.org/~phk | phk@login.dknet.dk    Private mailbox.
whois: [PHK]                | phk@ref.tfs.com       TRW Financial Systems, Inc.
Future will arrive by its own means, progress not so.