From owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jun 24 15:47:46 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id ECA8E16A4CE; Thu, 24 Jun 2004 15:47:46 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from skywalker.rogness.net (skywalker.rogness.net [64.251.173.102])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 8AE7B43D46; Thu, 24 Jun 2004 15:47:46 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from nick@rogness.net)
Received: from skywalker.rogness.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	i5OFl0Lb010319;	Thu, 24 Jun 2004 09:47:00 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from nick@rogness.net)
Received: from localhost (nick@localhost)i5OFkvjg010316;
	Thu, 24 Jun 2004 09:46:57 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from nick@rogness.net)
X-Authentication-Warning: skywalker.rogness.net: nick owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 09:46:57 -0600 (MDT)
From: Nick Rogness <nick@rogness.net>
To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20040624072505.GA63534@ip.net.ua>
Message-ID: <20040624094625.I10310@skywalker.rogness.net>
References: <200406240636.i5O6adNV000825@ns.networkersbg.com>
	<20040624010726.H5174@skywalker.rogness.net>
	<20040624072505.GA63534@ip.net.ua>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
cc: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
cc: Evgeny Ivanov <evgeny@networkersbg.com>
Subject: Re: tables in ipfw2
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions <freebsd-ipfw.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ipfw>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ipfw>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ipfw>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 15:47:47 -0000

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 01:09:14AM -0600, Nick Rogness wrote:
>> Is there any reason why IPFW2 has not become the standard
>> IPFW...still not stable enough or ???  IPFW2 is backwards
>> compatible with IPFW is it not?
>>
> It's standard in 5.x.

 	Sorry, I was referring to the 4.10 RELEASE and 4-STABLE.

Nick Rogness <nick@rogness.net>
-
   How many people here have telekenetic powers? Raise my hand.
   				-Emo Philips