Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 25 Oct 2012 20:25:07 +0400
From:      "Andrey V. Elsukov" <ae@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r242079 - in head: sbin/ipfw share/man/man4 sys/conf sys/net sys/netinet sys/netinet6 sys/netpfil/ipfw
Message-ID:  <508967E3.3070508@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <508960C2.6030003@freebsd.org>
References:  <201210250939.q9P9dF0q022970@svn.freebsd.org> <508960C2.6030003@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 25.10.2012 19:54, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> I still don't agree with naming the sysctl net.pfil.forward.  This
> type of forwarding is a property of IPv4 and IPv6 and thus should
> be put there.  Pfil hooking can be on layer 2, 2-bridging, 3 and
> who knows where else in the future.  Forwarding works only for IPv46.
> 
> You haven't even replied to my comment on net@.  Please change the
> sysctl location and name to its appropriate place.

Hi Andre,

There were two replies related to this subject, you did not replied to
them and i thought that you became agree.
So, if not, what you think about the name net.pfil.ipforward?

> Also an MFC's after 2 weeks must ensure that compiling with IPFIREWALL_
> FORWARD enabled the sysctl at the same time to keep kernel configs
> within 9-stable working.

Yes, it will work like that.

-- 
WBR, Andrey V. Elsukov



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?508967E3.3070508>