From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Sep 13 20:43:24 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id A2CD816A4CF; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 20:43:24 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from tigra.ip.net.ua (tigra.ip.net.ua [82.193.96.10])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id A042B43D39; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 20:43:21 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from ru@ip.net.ua)
Received: from heffalump.ip.net.ua (heffalump.ip.net.ua [82.193.96.213])
	by tigra.ip.net.ua (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i8DKhHtk095109
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Mon, 13 Sep 2004 23:43:17 +0300 (EEST)
	(envelope-from ru@ip.net.ua)
Received: (from ru@localhost)
	by heffalump.ip.net.ua (8.13.1/8.13.1) id i8DKhI2g077955;
	Mon, 13 Sep 2004 23:43:18 +0300 (EEST)
	(envelope-from ru)
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 23:43:18 +0300
From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org>
To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20040913204318.GA71517@ip.net.ua>
References: <4145D02C.D02A18A0@freebsd.org> <20040913183038.GA25795@ip.net.ua>
	<4145EA7C.3000902@freebsd.org> <20040913185452.GB25795@ip.net.ua>
	<4145EE92.2060802@freebsd.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="MGYHOYXEY6WxJCY8"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4145EE92.2060802@freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ipfw tee fixed [cvs commit: src/sbin/ipfw ipfw.8
	src/sys/netinet ip_fw_pfil.c]
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 20:43:24 -0000


--MGYHOYXEY6WxJCY8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 09:01:38PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
>=20
> >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. =
=20
> >>>>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").
>=20
> Under BUGS the ipfw(8) man page now says only 'divert' will reassemble
> the packet.  The old version said both do it.  So I've changed that and
> removed 'tee' from it.  Other than that there is no reference to this
> (non-)behaviour anywhere in that man page.
>=20
I specifically said divert(4) not ipfw(8).  ;)


Cheers,
--=20
Ruslan Ermilov
ru@FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD committer

--MGYHOYXEY6WxJCY8
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFBRgZmqRfpzJluFF4RAkoEAJwKNq6Ay3iuobHbStLNEXOjY5dYzgCeM5aF
6AGSOoIzKJyNOxZzKYCsB5A=
=IY//
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--MGYHOYXEY6WxJCY8--