Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 21:54:52 +0300 From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ipfw tee fixed [cvs commit: src/sbin/ipfw ipfw.8 src/sys/netinet ip_fw_pfil.c] Message-ID: <20040913185452.GB25795@ip.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <4145EA7C.3000902@freebsd.org> References: <4145D02C.D02A18A0@freebsd.org> <20040913183038.GA25795@ip.net.ua> <4145EA7C.3000902@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 08:44:12PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: > Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > >On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 06:51:56PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: > > > >>I've fixed 'ipfw tee' in 6-current. Please try it and report back. This > >>is pretty useful for passive packet monitoring. > >> > > > >Just to make it crystal clear for everyone, the tee'd fragments are > >still reassembled into a full packet before the diversion, correct? > > No, they are not. Only diverted packets are reassembled, tee'd packet > are not. > Then at least the divert(4) manpage should be updated to document the difference in behavior (between "divert" and "tee"). Cheers, -- Ruslan Ermilov ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBRez8qRfpzJluFF4RAm5KAJ4zIqy4ibtMn4zjLqS3kwKPpSBtOgCgj1rt ALhXtB3N8hE9MfYy/2lhEPQ= =NNuT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040913185452.GB25795>