From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Sep 14 12:38:25 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 A608416A4CE; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 12:38:25 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from hetzner.co.za (lfw.hetzner.co.za [196.7.18.226])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id CD64243D55; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 12:38:24 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from ianf@hetzner.co.za)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1])
	by hetzner.co.za with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
	id 1C7CZi-000HHJ-00; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 14:38:22 +0200
To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
From: Ian FREISLICH <if@hetzner.co.za>
In-Reply-To: Message from Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> 
   of "Mon, 13 Sep 2004 18:51:56 +0200." <4145D02C.D02A18A0@freebsd.org> 
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 14:38:22 +0200
Sender: ianf@hetzner.co.za
Message-Id: <E1C7CZi-000HHJ-00@hetzner.co.za>
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: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 12:38:25 -0000

Andre Oppermann wrote:
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> --------------BF081F7C001E4F9B32C647BE
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> 
> I've fixed 'ipfw tee' in 6-current.  Please try it and report back.  This
> is pretty useful for passive packet monitoring.

Yes.  This works a treat.

Thanks
Ian

--
Ian Freislich