From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan 20 19:53:42 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11F0A16A4CE
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 20 Jan 2005 19:53:42 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from marvin.muc.de (marvin.muc.de [193.149.48.2])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 13E1743D4C
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 20 Jan 2005 19:53:41 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from emechler@radix.cryptio.net)
Received: (qmail 4160 invoked by alias); 20 Jan 2005 19:53:39 -0000
Delivered-To: mods-muc-lists-freebsd-security@moderators.muc.de
Received: (qmail 4153 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2005 19:53:38 -0000
Received: from radix.cryptio.net (64.81.55.119)
  by marvin.muc.de with SMTP; 20 Jan 2005 19:53:38 -0000
Received: from radix.cryptio.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by radix.cryptio.net (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j0KJrXDx072322
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:53:33 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from emechler@radix.cryptio.net)
Received: (from emechler@localhost)
	by radix.cryptio.net (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id j0KJrXSB072321;
	Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:53:33 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from emechler)
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:53:33 -0800
From: Erick Mechler <emechler@techometer.net>
To: Rudolf Polzer <divzero@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050120195333.GQ19851@techometer.net>
References: <6BBE5C5603D0D611A06F0002A5D6556405FAA185@nyschx22psge.sch.ge.com>
	<20050119180131.GL19851@techometer.net>
	<slrncuta62.tj6.divzero@message-id.durchnull.ath.cx>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <slrncuta62.tj6.divzero@message-id.durchnull.ath.cx>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:13:20 +0000
cc: muc-lists-freebsd-security@moderators.muc.de
Subject: Re: ipf question
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting]
	<freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>,
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>,
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 19:53:42 -0000

:: >   ... port 136 >< 140 keep state
:: > 
:: > The < and > operators are not inclusive.
:: 
:: I know it has been defined like that. But why?
:: 
:: Why wasn't an inclusive .. operator used? There must be a reason for 
:: this, but which one is it?

AFAIK, there is no such thing as an inclusive gt or lt operator.