From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 2 13:48:16 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E5DC16A420; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 13:48:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rizzo@icir.org) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (xorpc.icir.org [192.150.187.68]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52C0043D5C; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 13:48:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rizzo@icir.org) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k12DlhC2099663; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 05:47:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: (from rizzo@localhost) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.11/8.12.3/Submit) id k12DlhQF099662; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 05:47:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 05:47:43 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo To: Max Laier Message-ID: <20060202054743.B99314@xorpc.icir.org> References: <20060201005658.A70005@xorpc.icir.org> <20060202070149.GD18601@ip.net.ua> <20060202124328.GK29980@comp.chem.msu.su> <200602021437.38385.max@love2party.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <200602021437.38385.max@love2party.net>; from max@love2party.net on Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 02:37:28PM +0100 Cc: Yar Tikhiy , Hajimu UMEMOTO , net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: if_bridge.ko requires INET6... X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 13:48:16 -0000 On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 02:37:28PM +0100, Max Laier wrote: > On Thursday 02 February 2006 13:43, Yar Tikhiy wrote: > > > This needs to be fixed in pf then. > > > > Max Laier and I discussed this issue once, and Max had concern > > over possible performance degradation that might result from > > calling pflog functions through pointers to be set by a separate > > pflog module. We can skip touching the pf module in RELENG_6 for > > now and leave the issue to after 6.1-RELEASE is out. > > I have convinced myself that we should really use a function pointer here. I good. > will try to commit a sollution to HEAD over the weekend. If you are MFC'ing > the changes *now*, I'd appreciate if you could spare out pf, but I am willing > to MFC the changes before 6.1 if testing goes well. i imagine "you" is Yar as i don't know exactly what was the change, i just raised the problem :) thanks luigi