From owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 11 17:56:59 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BC9710657CC for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:56:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from out-0.mx.aerioconnect.net (out-0-30.mx.aerioconnect.net [216.240.47.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F286B8FC1D for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:56:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from idiom.com (postfix@mx0.idiom.com [216.240.32.160]) by out-0.mx.aerioconnect.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o2BHuv2q002022; Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:56:57 -0800 X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e Received: from julian-mac.elischer.org (h-67-100-89-137.snfccasy.static.covad.net [67.100.89.137]) by idiom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B3DB2D601B; Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:56:57 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B992EE8.30309@elischer.org> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:56:56 -0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Macintosh/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: n j References: <92bcbda51003100912k25facb5cxc9047105c91a4022@mail.gmail.com> <4B97E412.1050506@elischer.org> <4B981FE5.5090905@smartt.com> <4B9828B2.2010903@elischer.org> <92bcbda51003110047s717bed1bq8bb3eb787eab47f7@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <92bcbda51003110047s717bed1bq8bb3eb787eab47f7@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 216.240.47.51 Cc: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IPFIREWALL_FORWARD X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:56:59 -0000 n j wrote: >> A loadable module requires a coherent piece of code to implement the >> functionality, that can be put into the module. This option >> scatters tiny snippets of code throughout the exisitng >> TCP/UDP/IP/ipfw code. > > Is that just a matter of current implementation or is that 'scatter' > necessary for forward functionality? it's needed for the functionality. you need to slightly change the behaviour or the existing stack in quite a number of places to handle a forwarded packet.