From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Jun 18 11:42: 6 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from distortion.dk (distortion.dk [195.249.147.156]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CB1215073; Fri, 18 Jun 1999 11:41:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from npp@distortion.dk) Received: from localhost (npp@localhost) by distortion.dk (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id WAA08617; Fri, 18 Jun 1999 22:15:14 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from npp@distortion.dk) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 22:15:14 +0200 (CEST) From: Nicolai Petri To: Brian Fundakowski Feldman Cc: Ruslan Ermilov , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Introduction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 18 Jun 1999, Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote: > On Fri, 18 Jun 1999, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > Let's join our efforts in this area! > > IPFW code is very ugly... > > Which is basically due to it being hacked on for years without a cleanup. > Now's the time (between major versions) to do this, I think. How's this: > let's organize a small group to bounce ideas off eachother, first of all > (I'm forwarding this to hackers to perhaps elicit a response of more people.) > We should get ideas on what people think is wrong with the current > implementation, what new features should be added, and where we should > rearchitect. What about support for protocol verification ?? (Example : Blocking of malformed ftp commands.) Wich layer would it be logically to implement this in ? Is a userland proxy the only way ? ------------ Nicolai Petri WM-data BFC To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message