Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 10:34:57 -0500 From: Maxim Khitrov <max@mxcrypt.com> To: =?UTF-8?Q?Ermal_Lu=C3=A7i?= <eri@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-pf@freebsd.org" <freebsd-pf@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. Message-ID: <CAJcQMWdwBXnnjrgy2AROXG5KdfFz5HPBg%2BNSMg5D2sMLKkoMTg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAPBZQG3Jnm-ksTd22oQ_tEHPVNiqZtkD=RdfRp5aGiVhnG_Zzw@mail.gmail.com> References: <op.wn1vktomjfousr@box.dlink.com> <CAAdA2WPLD7MRLTV6Ah57dxDLwK6qaoPfzmWdFO0m%2B2bAd_Xq2Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAPBZQG2R%2BLXTo8xXZNhfWg%2BS4wtkDc1cAuhoHqdgyiGDGZuXOw@mail.gmail.com> <CAEW%2BogbUkHTaef98=CusV%2BV3qTFHqj-7x-_icKaom_0d2gv69g@mail.gmail.com> <CAPBZQG3SSZorVG5tZ-S6zxs8nW%2Bz7kQX3-J2mSKPOHtbq_kFdQ@mail.gmail.com> <E1TbXWd-0000vf-Mu@clue.co.za> <CAPBZQG3Jnm-ksTd22oQ_tEHPVNiqZtkD=RdfRp5aGiVhnG_Zzw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Ermal Lu=C3=A7i <eri@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Ian FREISLICH <ianf@clue.co.za> wrote: > >> =3D?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ermal_Lu=3DE7i?=3D wrote: >> > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Sami Halabi <sodynet1@gmail.com> wrot= e: >> > > This was actually discussed much before, as I read it would make som= e >> > > issues with the new pf-smp work done by gleb. >> > > >> > Not really since Gleb just changed the locking and nothing else. >> > All his work is under the hood. >> > >> > He actually broke if-bound state but that's another story. >> >> Do you have more details on this? We use ifbound state in production >> and I haven't noticed any issues with ifbound state, the way that >> we use it. >> >> Well 'broken' is maybe not the good word depending on the context. > The issue is that if-bound state in HEAD is a null op. > Since every state goes into the hash buckets. > > Before with if-bound states a state will be bound to an interface so a > packet coming/going from/to another interface would not match. > Also would give some resilience with dynamic interfaces. > > Today its a null op. So it voids the keyword which should be deprecated i= n > FreeBSD or should be reintroduced! > Also it may break people assumptions on it. So I take it that "set state-policy if-bound" will no longer have any effect either? Is this expected to hit 10.0-RELEASE? It's definitely not ok to break this functionality. SMP changes are far less valuable than being able to filter each packet on ingress and egress. - Max
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJcQMWdwBXnnjrgy2AROXG5KdfFz5HPBg%2BNSMg5D2sMLKkoMTg>