On 2015-12-25 12:36 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 23/12/2015 11:49 PM, Mark Felder wrote:
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015, at 08:40, Julian Elischer wrote:
This is EXACTLY what the cisco/ironport web filter appliance does...
If we had this in FreeBSD nobody would have to reinvent the wheel to
build a similar appliance, right? And it might allow someone to build a
competing open source FreeBSD-based web filter appliance with this same
feature set...
nah...there is SO MUCH MORE to what the ironport does.
Yes and that is why FWD action isn't part of the bridge if I recall the
old discussions.
Where I work, we also have a L2 transparent proxy (we wrote it way back
on FBSD 4.5 based on Luigi's old bridge code) but it is very specific
for one particular application.
Trying to support a generic L2 FWD action that does any next hop
forwarding as a general solution (which is what you'd need to do for
FBSD) would require a lot of code most users wouldn't want to see the
bridge burden with.
Well that is what we've seen throughout the years.
K.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ipfw
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ipfw-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
