From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 15 08:58:34 2004 Return-Path: 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 9F6B716A4CE; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 08:58:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mx01.bos.ma.towardex.com (mx01.bos.ma.towardex.com [65.124.16.9]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BF6143D31; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 08:58:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from haesu@mx01.bos.ma.towardex.com) Received: by mx01.bos.ma.towardex.com (TowardEX ESMTP 3.0p11_DAKN, from userid 1001) id 515A02F944; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 03:58:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 03:58:34 -0500 From: James To: Gleb Smirnoff , Andre Oppermann , vova@fbsd.ru, Luigi Rizzo , freebsd-net@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20041215085834.GA50426@scylla.towardex.com> References: <20041213124051.GB32719@cell.sick.ru> <200412131743.36722.max@love2party.net> <20041213104200.A62152@xorpc.icir.org> <20041214085123.GB42820@cell.sick.ru> <1103017203.1060.25.camel@localhost> <41BEE281.607DD0A8@freebsd.org> <1103035345.1060.55.camel@localhost> <41BF008D.AD79C9B@freebsd.org> <20041215081810.GA53509@cell.sick.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041215081810.GA53509@cell.sick.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Subject: Re: per-interface packet filters X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 08:58:34 -0000 On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 11:18:10AM +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: [ snip ] > > Sorry, but the short answer is "same was as in Cisco|Juniper world". The longer > description is: > > The cloner will. If this was sysadmin with ifconfig in his hands, then he > will attach chains to interface. The same was you do it "config term" mode. > If that was an interface auto created by ppp/mpd/etc, than the soft will do > attach chains according to its config file, the same way as you have > interface templates in router-world. This is not a matter of Cisco-copy or Juniper-copy -- any properly operating router vendor with service provider featureset would implement per-interface firewall hooks (including us). I simply disagreed with the ipfw modification (btw it was my personal disagreement, not a constructive one), but not Gleb's idea. In my ideal world of things, I'd rather have per-interface hooked firewalls operating inside ip_fastforward, not inside regular ip_input functions. At least in the way we modify things for our own, we insert all router-like functionalities within the ip_fastfwd.c ; ip_input.c and others are largely untouched for regular non-router host environment. -J -- James Jun TowardEX Technologies, Inc. Technical Lead Boston IPv4/IPv6 Web Hosting, Colocation and james@towardex.com Network design/consulting & configuration services cell: 1(978)-394-2867 web: http://www.towardex.com , noc: www.twdx.net