From owner-freebsd-net Mon May 1 12:26: 3 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from bubba.whistle.com (bubba.whistle.com [207.76.205.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42A9937BE23 for ; Mon, 1 May 2000 12:26:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from archie@whistle.com) Received: (from archie@localhost) by bubba.whistle.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id MAA93100 for freebsd-net@freebsd.org; Mon, 1 May 2000 12:26:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Archie Cobbs Message-Id: <200005011926.MAA93100@bubba.whistle.com> Subject: ether matching in ipfw?? To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 12:26:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In trying to clean up this bridging stuff, I just realized that ip_fw_chk() contains code for matching Ethernet headers and non IP packets! Does the "ip" in "ipfw" not mean anything to anyone?? This hack is just too gross and I plan to rip it out. Call me Danish if you like. We can put it back later in a separate place (as a separate callout from ether_input(), netgraph node, or whatever) after finishing the ether_input() cleanups. -Archie ___________________________________________________________________________ Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message