From owner-freebsd-net Tue Feb 13 9: 1:48 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from urban.iinet.net.au (urban.iinet.net.au [203.59.24.231]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4C4037B4EC for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:01:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from elischer.org (reggae-03-89.nv.iinet.net.au [203.59.78.89]) by urban.iinet.net.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA01912; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 01:01:34 +0800 Message-ID: <3A896861.94465630@elischer.org> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:01:21 -0800 From: Julian Elischer X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT i386) X-Accept-Language: en, hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mbytnar@auvo.com Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ipfw command "in xmit " and "out recv " invalid? References: <3A895E3D.439DCCF3@auvo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Mike Bytnar wrote: > > Is this a bug or have I misunderstood? > Why is it possible to say "out recv "? Or for that matter, "in > xmit "? > > bridge# ipfw add 500 pipe 2 ip from any to any out recv xl1 > 00500 pipe 5 ip from any to any out recv xl1 if the filter is called from ip_output() and the packet was received on xl1 (then we must be routing it) > bridge# ipfw add 600 pipe 3 ip from any to any in xmit xl1 > [ipfw usage displayed] if we were called from ip_input() then we have not yet decided if it will be retransmitted from an interface, let alone which one.. so this makes no sense. > > (Using 4.2-STABLE from a week ago.) > > Thanks, > --Mike > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message -- __--_|\ Julian Elischer / \ julian@elischer.org ( OZ ) World tour 2000-2001 ---> X_.---._/ v To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message