From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Feb  8 14:09:23 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AD3D1065781;
	Wed,  8 Feb 2012 14:09:23 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from cell.glebius.int.ru (glebius.int.ru [81.19.64.117])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E54448FC14;
	Wed,  8 Feb 2012 14:09:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from cell.glebius.int.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by cell.glebius.int.ru (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q18E9Lil023577;
	Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:09:21 +0400 (MSK)
	(envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org)
Received: (from glebius@localhost)
	by cell.glebius.int.ru (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q18E9Lfq023576;
	Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:09:21 +0400 (MSK)
	(envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cell.glebius.int.ru: glebius set sender to
	glebius@FreeBSD.org using -f
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:09:21 +0400
From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>
To: Ermal Lu?i <eri@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20120208140921.GM13554@glebius.int.ru>
References: <CAPBZQG32iyzkec4PG+qay9bKfd0GiffKyRBapLkATKvHr7cVww@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120131110204.GA95472@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
	<20120208133559.GK13554@FreeBSD.org>
	<CAPBZQG0edS3sru=D_iGMsNDC5EA8H=A=wwRUDOGZi9DtU5-CkQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAPBZQG0edS3sru=D_iGMsNDC5EA8H=A=wwRUDOGZi9DtU5-CkQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: freebsd-net <freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org>, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it>,
	freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] multiple instances of ipfw(4)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:09:23 -0000

On Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 03:04:09PM +0100, Ermal Lu?i wrote:
E> 2012/2/8 Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>:
E> > On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 12:02:04PM +0100, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
E> > L> if i understand what the patch does, i think it makes sense to be
E> > L> able to hook ipfw instances to specific interfaces/sets of interfaces,
E> > L> as it permits the writing of more readable rulesets. Right now the
E> > L> workaround is start the ruleset with skipto rules matching on
E> > L> interface names, and then use some discipline in "reserving" a range
E> > L> of rule numbers to each interface.
E> >
E> > This is definitely a desired feature, but it should be implemented
E> > on level of pfil(9). However, that would still require multiple
E> > instances of ipfw(4).
E> >
E> This opens a discussion of architecture design.
E> I do not think presently pfil(9) is designed to handle such thing!

Several years ago, I guess around 2005, a discussion on a per-interface
packet filtering was taken on the net@ mailing list. In that time, it lead
to nothing, several people were against the idea.

Recently on IRC I had raised the discussion again. Today more people liked
the idea and found it a desired feature.

Many kinds of high end networking equipment have per-interface ACLs. I know
that networking sysadmins would be happy if FreeBSD packet filters would
get this feature, since maintaing such ACLs is much easier on a router with
dozens of interfaces.

-- 
Totus tuus, Glebius.