From owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org  Wed Aug  3 19:10:49 2016
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76A71BAEFE4
 for <freebsd-ipfw@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Wed,  3 Aug 2016 19:10:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ae@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [8.8.178.116])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client CN "mx2.freebsd.org", Issuer "Gandi Standard SSL CA 2" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AD141D98;
 Wed,  3 Aug 2016 19:10:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ae@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from butcher-nb.yandex.net (freefall.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87])
 by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 302B679342;
 Wed,  3 Aug 2016 19:10:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ae@FreeBSD.org)
Subject: Re: IPFW: more "orthogonal? state operations, push into 11?
To: lev@FreeBSD.org, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>,
 Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au>
References: <9229d4f7-8466-57b0-c954-117736102bd7@FreeBSD.org>
 <5755F0D3.9060909@FreeBSD.org> <5759DB79.10205@FreeBSD.org>
 <3d09497c-136c-e217-154c-ba00e6879c6f@freebsd.org>
 <20160616005016.A15883@sola.nimnet.asn.au>
 <d7bef617-70a4-f761-7d09-9413eb720b11@freebsd.org>
 <64d6bdea-fa32-f16f-2fdd-abd33d54d04e@freebsd.org>
 <46d5cfde-c4ac-ebd0-3c13-2759037621f3@FreeBSD.org>
 <11a5d41b-109a-434b-e8e0-7ed2826a8cc9@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
From: "Andrey V. Elsukov" <ae@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <ee745842-c33e-4e73-f84c-6eb11f283b51@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 22:08:59 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <11a5d41b-109a-434b-e8e0-7ed2826a8cc9@FreeBSD.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 boundary="UGKoLmUajKWthBrcgnt4opFJmdxf2rN1a"
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions <freebsd-ipfw.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ipfw>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ipfw/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ipfw>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2016 19:10:49 -0000

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--UGKoLmUajKWthBrcgnt4opFJmdxf2rN1a
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="VNvXmvXE7E6u12EIfunCCiIsDHOQL0wje"
From: "Andrey V. Elsukov" <ae@FreeBSD.org>
To: lev@FreeBSD.org, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>,
 Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au>
Cc: "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <ee745842-c33e-4e73-f84c-6eb11f283b51@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: IPFW: more "orthogonal? state operations, push into 11?
References: <9229d4f7-8466-57b0-c954-117736102bd7@FreeBSD.org>
 <5755F0D3.9060909@FreeBSD.org> <5759DB79.10205@FreeBSD.org>
 <3d09497c-136c-e217-154c-ba00e6879c6f@freebsd.org>
 <20160616005016.A15883@sola.nimnet.asn.au>
 <d7bef617-70a4-f761-7d09-9413eb720b11@freebsd.org>
 <64d6bdea-fa32-f16f-2fdd-abd33d54d04e@freebsd.org>
 <46d5cfde-c4ac-ebd0-3c13-2759037621f3@FreeBSD.org>
 <11a5d41b-109a-434b-e8e0-7ed2826a8cc9@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <11a5d41b-109a-434b-e8e0-7ed2826a8cc9@FreeBSD.org>

--VNvXmvXE7E6u12EIfunCCiIsDHOQL0wje
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 03.08.16 22:07, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
> On 03.08.2016 21:03, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
>=20
>>> 1/ ability to use keep-state without an implicit check-state. <--- mo=
st
>>> important for me. (store-state)?
>>> 2/ ability to keep-state without actually doing it <---- less importa=
nt
>>> for me.
>> So, if there are nobody against, I plan to commit this part in a sever=
al
>> days.
>  Which implementation? Just curious, I could live with any, really.

This one
https://people.freebsd.org/~ae/ipfw.diff

but with separate opcodes, I  have come to the opinion, that this will
be more readable.

--=20
WBR, Andrey V. Elsukov


--VNvXmvXE7E6u12EIfunCCiIsDHOQL0wje--

--UGKoLmUajKWthBrcgnt4opFJmdxf2rN1a
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEsBAEBCAAWBQJXokFLDxxhZUBmcmVlYnNkLm9yZwAKCRABxeoEEMihepldB/wJ
UZVuTP/TSdpYsYbcxEi2j6oMYl2muRYNvcHF+iYy6xSs368NP1UgNl41L/qS7h24
BlEPQciXgZnOTD8biZCOLoNchJFN7RZJNT4cOzPg/XV46Vt9mykrapyuS8ELe29l
icsKQUGYmiJZEWK6H4XdFpNqZ+ohRId6NzLMFqRTNdaPs9mNE9hS6jsNWPd3iKam
tShEcS/BjspHov7Dm7r6uu01fQ8OZKJ1uN/NBu7uE1lwFTug7E9pzlKvTFt89bP4
pA4AQCB9xhluuVS//hVPg3CjbOUbADS+38FILH+31KoXudWuDVm3t0i3Vti0HcJH
fs0T8YTWgmQBNoTX6pZ2
=wykh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--UGKoLmUajKWthBrcgnt4opFJmdxf2rN1a--