From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 10 19:40:42 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA013106568D; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 19:40:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from qing.li@bluecoat.com) Received: from whisker.bluecoat.com (whisker.bluecoat.com [216.52.23.28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABB6F8FC1C; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 19:40:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bcs-mail03.internal.cacheflow.com ([10.2.2.95]) by whisker.bluecoat.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o0AJefGA028050; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:40:42 -0800 (PST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:40:34 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20100110185232.GA27907@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Unified rc.firewall ipfw me/me6 issue Thread-Index: AcqSJSaXOe/YiAX5TAqjTGXen62l7AAB4P+Q References: <25ff90d60912162320y286e37a0ufeb64397716d8c18@mail.gmail.com><25ff90d60912180612y2b1f64fbw34b4d7f648762087@mail.gmail.com><25ff90d61001021736p7b695197q104f4a7769b51b71@mail.gmail.com> <20100110185232.GA27907@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> From: "Li, Qing" To: "Luigi Rizzo" , "Hajimu UMEMOTO" Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, David Horn , freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Unified rc.firewall ipfw me/me6 issue X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 19:40:42 -0000 >=20 > We only need one 'me' option that matches v4 and v6, because the > other two can be implemented as 'ip4 me' and 'ip6 me' at no extra > cost (the code for 'me' only scans the list corresponding to the > actual address family of the packet). I would actually vote for > removing the 'me6' microinstruction from the kernel, and implement > it in /sbin/ipfw by generating 'ip6 me'. >=20 I agree with Luigi. -- Qing