From owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 29 08:35:10 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FB6616A4CE for ; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 08:35:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from transport.cksoft.de (transport.cksoft.de [62.111.66.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9628D43D2F for ; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 08:35:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net) Received: from transport.cksoft.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by transport.cksoft.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBDC81FF90C; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 09:35:07 +0100 (CET) Received: by transport.cksoft.de (Postfix, from userid 66) id CBEB91FF9A8; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 09:35:05 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.int.zabbadoz.net (Postfix, from userid 1060) id DA66A15380; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 08:30:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.int.zabbadoz.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFCBD15336; Wed, 29 Dec 2004 08:30:47 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 08:30:47 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" X-X-Sender: bz@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net To: David Schwartz In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS cksoft-s20020300-20031204bz on transport.cksoft.de cc: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PATCH: AGAIN, Add creation time to dynamic firewall rules X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 08:35:10 -0000 On Wed, 29 Dec 2004, David Schwartz wrote: > > I submitted this email and patch about a month ago. I received a few "this > is a good idea" type replies. I'd like to see it committed to current. .... > > --- ip_fw.h 1.89.2.2 2004/10/03 17:04:40 > > +++ ip_fw.h Fri Nov 26 18:51:15 2004 > > @@ -353,6 +353,7 @@ struct _ipfw_dyn_rule { > > u_int64_t bcnt; /* byte match counter */ > > struct ipfw_flow_id id; /* (masked) flow id */ > > u_int32_t expire; /* expire time */ > > + u_int32_t created; /* creation time */ > > u_int32_t bucket; /* which bucket in hash table */ > > u_int32_t state; /* state of this rule (typically a *hmm* on sparc times are already 64bit. Does that matter? -- Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT