From owner-freebsd-current Mon Jan 24 17:47: 6 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from sasami.jurai.net (sasami.jurai.net [63.67.141.99]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A783A14A04 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 17:47:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from winter@jurai.net) Received: from localhost (winter@localhost) by sasami.jurai.net (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA64542 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 20:47:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 20:47:02 -0500 (EST) From: "Matthew N. Dodd" To: current@freebsd.org Subject: sys/net/bridge.c IPFIREWALL & DUMMYNET? WTF? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Any reason that the IPFIREWALL and DUMMYNET code is present in sys/net/bridge.c? It appears that it makes a number of bad assumptions and in general violates the semantics of 'bridging' vs. 'routing'. Should we even encourage people to use this functionality? Do we really want bridge.c to have its own private IP stack? Should this code be diked out before 4.0 so we don't expose the masses to it? -- | Matthew N. Dodd | '78 Datsun 280Z | '75 Volvo 164E | FreeBSD/NetBSD | | winter@jurai.net | 2 x '84 Volvo 245DL | ix86,sparc,pmax | | http://www.jurai.net/~winter | This Space For Rent | ISO8802.5 4ever | To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message