Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 08:29:50 -0600 From: Matt Freitag <mfreitag@gulfgateequipment.com> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 5.1->5.2 Message-ID: <4007F55E.8010003@gulfgateequipment.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040115170208.74950B-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040115170208.74950B-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Now I can play with ULE, Thanks for your quick response. I should've checked release notes before posting my question, my fault. -mpf Robert Watson wrote: >On Thu, 15 Jan 2004, Matt Freitag wrote: > > > >>Building 5.2-RELEASE from 5.1-RELEASE-p10 w/ipf+ipfw+ipfw6+dummynet, 5.1 >>Compiled fine with this setup. I need ipfilter as it's doing my source >>routing for ipv6 (multiple transits) since ip6fw doesn't support fwd. (I >>just use ip6fw for filtering, and ipf for forwarding to the correct >>interface according to source) Am I just being stupid here somehow? >> >> > >IPFILTER now relies on the PFIL_HOOKS kernel option; this is something >that is somewhat poorly documented, and we should add it to the errate I >suspect. If you add "options PFIL_HOOKS" to your kernel config, it should >work. Moving to PFIL_HOOKS for all the "funky IP input/ouput" feature is >a goal for 5.3 (in fact, I believe Sam has it almost entirely done in one >of his development branches), and should both simplify the input/output >paths, and also simplify locking for the IP stack. So the change is for a >good cause :-). > >Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects >robert@fledge.watson.org Senior Research Scientist, McAfee Research > > > > > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4007F55E.8010003>