From owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Nov 22 14:13:20 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 133F9FDF;
 Thu, 22 Nov 2012 14:13:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ianf@clue.co.za)
Received: from zcs04.jnb1.cloudseed.co.za (zcs04.jnb1.cloudseed.co.za
 [41.154.0.161])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86B1A8FC12;
 Thu, 22 Nov 2012 14:13:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by zcs04.jnb1.cloudseed.co.za (Postfix) with ESMTP id DABF92A82C38;
 Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:13:09 +0200 (SAST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zcs04.jnb1.cloudseed.co.za
Received: from zcs04.jnb1.cloudseed.co.za ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (zcs04.jnb1.cloudseed.co.za [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id eUaRX0dYhfOy; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:13:09 +0200 (SAST)
Received: from clue.co.za (41-135-84-24.dsl.mweb.co.za [41.135.84.24])
 by zcs04.jnb1.cloudseed.co.za (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4E43F2A82A76;
 Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:13:09 +0200 (SAST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=clue.co.za)
 by clue.co.za with esmtp (Exim 4.80 (FreeBSD))
 (envelope-from <ianf@clue.co.za>)
 id 1TbXWd-0000vf-Mu; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:13:07 +0200
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ermal_Lu=E7i?= <eri@freebsd.org>
From: Ian FREISLICH <ianf@clue.co.za>
Subject: Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax.
In-Reply-To: <CAPBZQG3SSZorVG5tZ-S6zxs8nW+z7kQX3-J2mSKPOHtbq_kFdQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPBZQG3SSZorVG5tZ-S6zxs8nW+z7kQX3-J2mSKPOHtbq_kFdQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <op.wn1vktomjfousr@box.dlink.com>
 <CAAdA2WPLD7MRLTV6Ah57dxDLwK6qaoPfzmWdFO0m+2bAd_Xq2Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPBZQG2R+LXTo8xXZNhfWg+S4wtkDc1cAuhoHqdgyiGDGZuXOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEW+ogbUkHTaef98=CusV+V3qTFHqj-7x-_icKaom_0d2gv69g@mail.gmail.com>
X-Attribution: BOFH
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:13:07 +0200
Message-Id: <E1TbXWd-0000vf-Mu@clue.co.za>
Cc: "freebsd-pf@freebsd.org" <freebsd-pf@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter
 \(pf\)" <freebsd-pf.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-pf>,
 <mailto:freebsd-pf-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-pf>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-pf@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-pf-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-pf>,
 <mailto:freebsd-pf-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 14:13:20 -0000

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ermal_Lu=E7i?= wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Sami Halabi <sodynet1@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This was actually discussed much before, as I read it would make some
> > issues with the new pf-smp work done by gleb.
> >
> Not really since Gleb just changed the locking and nothing else.
> All his work is under the hood.
> 
> He actually broke if-bound state but that's another story.

Do you have more details on this?  We use ifbound state in production
and I haven't noticed any issues with ifbound state, the way that
we use it.

There is however an issue with route-to and reply-to when using
ifbound state, but that problem existed before Gleb's work.

Ian

-- 
Ian Freislich