Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:41:35 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> To: Ian FREISLICH <if@hetzner.co.za> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New preview patch for ipfw to pfil_hooks conversion Message-ID: <40D81AEF.20579AAC@freebsd.org> References: <E1BcgeP-000DXq-00@hetzner.co.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ian FREISLICH wrote: > > Andre Oppermann wrote: > > Here is the next preview patch for the ipfw to pfil_hooks conversion: > > > > http://www.nrg4u.com/freebsd/ipfw-pfilhooks-and-more-20040621.diff > > > > This patch significantly cleans up ip_input.c and ip_output.c. > > That would be a very a nice thing, but it looks like this breaks > the patch that I submitted (kern/64240) which fixes the acknowledged > problem with 'ipfw tee' accepting packets instead of copying them > to the divert port and then processing the packet according to the > rest of the rule set. Hmmm... I'll have a look at kern/64240. I guess while I'm rewriting this stuff anyway I can fix this too in one go. > There have been about 5 PRs (most with patches) in the past years > which all claim to fix this problem indicating that here is a need > for a fix. We rely on the fix in kern/64240 to collect traffic > accounting information for billing and statistical purposes. There > hasn't been much interest from the committers in having a look at > this even though the work has already been done. Could you give me all PR numbers? That'll make it easier for me get the code in. > Now that you're actively working on that part of the source, would > it be possible to take a look? I would also be happy to create a > new patch to fix this problem against ipfw with pfilhooks if that's > what it's going to take to get a fix committed. It's ok, I don't need new patches against the converted pfil_hooks code. -- Andre
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40D81AEF.20579AAC>