From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Aug 23 10:46:11 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA16955
          for current-outgoing; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 10:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from red.jnx.com (ppp-206-170-2-37.sntc01.pacbell.net [206.170.2.37])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA16948;
          Fri, 23 Aug 1996 10:46:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from base.jnx.com (base.jnx.com [208.197.169.238]) by red.jnx.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA18116; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 10:46:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from base.jnx.com (localhost.jnx.com [127.0.0.1]) by base.jnx.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA16117; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 10:45:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199608231745.KAA16117@base.jnx.com>
To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
cc: sos@FreeBSD.org, rgrimes@GndRsh.aac.dev.com, archie@whistle.com,
        julian@whistle.com, current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet in.h ip_fw.h ip_input.c ip_output.c 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 23 Aug 1996 10:14:46 PDT."
             <199608231714.KAA16063@phaeton.artisoft.com> 
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 10:45:53 -0700
From: Paul Traina <pst@jnx.com>
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Good point.  It saves re-doing a lot of work (e.g. protocol classification)
if you do it in the IP stack, but there's nothing *forcing* it to be IP 
specific.

  From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
  Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet in.h ip_fw.h ip_input.c ip_output.c
  > By not agressive enough, I mean I think you have the right idea, but the
  > syntax
  > for the hook should be something like:
  > 
  > 	for (hook = iphooks.ipinput.lh_first; hook; hook = hook->next) {
  > 		if (!(*hook)(IP_INPUT, &m, &ip))
  > 			break;
  > 	}
  > 
  > Basicly, we make a linked list of hooks and call them in order until one of
  > them swallows the packet or they're all complete.
  > 
  > We do this for ip input processing, ip output processing, and perhaps as
  > suggested, in the IP raw input (packet received) processing section of the 
>>code.
  > 
  > Then, if you want IP filtering, just add the hook to the generic "registry"
  
  Question: is there any particular reason this should be IP specific?
  
  
  					Terry Lambert
  					terry@lambert.org
  ---
  Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
  or previous employers.