Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 19:09:47 -0700 From: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Marc Perisa <perisa@porsche.de> Cc: ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bridge(4) and non-IP packets Message-ID: <20020528190947.A14555@iguana.icir.org> In-Reply-To: <3CF43436.6080008@porsche.de>; from perisa@porsche.de on Wed, May 29, 2002 at 03:51:50AM %2B0200 References: <3CF43436.6080008@porsche.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
we are in code freeze now so it is not a good time to work on -stable. Re. current, i recently introduced the ability to match packets basing on the MAC header, so the patch in the PR is not necessary there. I might MFC the code after 4.6 is out. cheers luigi On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 03:51:50AM +0200, Marc Perisa wrote: > Hi, > > Joost Bekkers filled in 2000 a PR ( > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/23771 ) that adds > compile options to the kernel for bridge(4). It helps to not brigde > no-IP packets. > > - Is the idea useful? ( adding a kernel compile option) > - Is the way the patch is coded ok? > - Should the patch be updated against -CURRENT or -STABLE code? > > If the answer is yes three times I will take a deeper look (and perhaps > add BRIDGE_ALLOW_IPX, BRIDGE_ALLOW_<protocol>) and update the patch > against the actual source. > > Another idea is to create a set of sysctl to handle different protocols > like net.link.ether.bridge_ipfw_<protocol>. Then a section for checking > the protocol of packets should be added. > > Whom I may ask for guidance? > > Thanks > > Marc > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020528190947.A14555>