Luigi Rizzo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ok, so the problem is the following: when i implemented ipfw2
i thought that 'recv any' or 'xmit any' were effectively NOPs
so the parser erroneously removes them, together with any 'not' prefix
(which is processed before).
That explains it.
I was a
On Wednesday 03 August 2005 06:19, Oliver Fromme wrote:
out and xmit is probably exactly the same
No, it's not. out just says that this rule matches only
outgoing packets. It doesn't specify anything about inter-
faces or addresses.
packages catched by xmit IF are catched with out as
the question is simple: i made a mistake in implementing
recv|xmit any, Oliver spotted it, i posted a fix.
Whether his example was a good one or not is rather irrelevant.
Hopefully the discussion has clarified that some checks
are redundant, but the compiler cannot possibly spot all useless
On Wednesday 03 August 2005 08:37, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
the question is simple: i made a mistake in implementing
recv|xmit any, Oliver spotted it, i posted a fix.
Whether his example was a good one or not is rather irrelevant.
Hopefully the discussion has clarified that some checks
are
AT Matik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 03 August 2005 06:19, Oliver Fromme wrote:
out and xmit is probably exactly the same
No, it's not. out just says that this rule matches only
outgoing packets. It doesn't specify anything about inter-
faces or addresses.
