From owner-freebsd-stable  Sat Jun 29 18:32:35 1996
Return-Path: owner-stable
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA00491
          for stable-outgoing; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 18:32:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zen.nash.org (nash.pr.mcs.net [204.95.47.72])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA18651
          for <stable@freebsd.org>; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 11:14:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from alex@localhost) by zen.nash.org (8.7.5/8.6.12) id NAA06766; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:14:30 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:14:30 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199606291814.NAA06766@zen.nash.org>
From: Alex Nash <alex@zen.nash.org>
To: nox@jelal.hb.north.de
Cc: stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ipfw (was: Re: lockups.)
Reply-to: nash@mcs.com
Sender: owner-stable@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > As far as accepting both versions: getting the new kernel to accept
> > the old struct would be fairly easy, the new ip_fw struct has some
> > extensions and two new flags, all easily defaulted.
> 
>  like... below? :)

Sorry, but attempting to maintain backwards compatibility at this
point is bogus.  The original ip_fw struct shipped in 2.1R contains
different fields yet is the exact same size as the previous ip_fw 
struct in stable.  Checking for a 64 byte structure does not give
you the information necessary to provide backwards compatibility.

Alex