From owner-freebsd-ipfw Mon Feb 21 5:43:53 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Received: from info.iet.unipi.it (info.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.184]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A317937BD5A for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 05:43:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from luigi@info.iet.unipi.it) Received: (from luigi@localhost) by info.iet.unipi.it (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA93003; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 14:43:25 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from luigi) From: Luigi Rizzo Message-Id: <200002211343.OAA93003@info.iet.unipi.it> Subject: Re: keep-state option in CURRENT. In-Reply-To: from "Nicolai Petri (ML)" at "Feb 21, 2000 02:46:28 pm" To: "Nicolai Petri (ML)" Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 14:43:24 +0100 (CET) Cc: freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL61 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I was wondering what the progress for keep-state is in current. I'm > currently using it for test and it looks very nice.. But it seems that my it's working in both -current and -stable. > dynamic rules are never deleted. Is this a bug or is it just not > implemented yet. They expire after some time (variable between 5 and 300s depending on the state), but expired rules are deleted in a lazy way, only when the code goes through them while scanning for matching rules or trying to find space. cheers luigi -----------------------------------+------------------------------------- Luigi RIZZO, luigi@iet.unipi.it . Dip. di Ing. dell'Informazione http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/ . Universita` di Pisa TEL/FAX: +39-050-568.533/522 . via Diotisalvi 2, 56126 PISA (Italy) Mobile +39-347-0373137 -----------------------------------+------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message