Hi,
> Any reason that the IPFIREWALL and DUMMYNET code is present in
> sys/net/bridge.c? It appears that it makes a number of bad assumptions
> and in general violates the semantics of 'bridging' vs. 'routing'.
the reason is that I needed that functionality, and according to
my experience most people who use bridging on FreeBSD do it just
because they can build a transparent firewall/traffic shaper.
They tell me there are very few if any solutions like this on the
market. So i don't think it is a good idea to remove this
feature which is a very strong selling point.
As for the quality of the code, (and i hope you refer to
the version just committed to -current/-stable) i myself i am
not terribly happy with it, but perhaps if you point out
what are the bad assumptions i make it would help me fix
the code.
cheers
luigi
> Should we even encourage people to use this functionality? Do we really
> want bridge.c to have its own private IP stack?
>
> Should this code be diked out before 4.0 so we don't expose the masses to
> it?
>
> --
> | Matthew N. Dodd | '78 Datsun 280Z | '75 Volvo 164E | FreeBSD/NetBSD |
> | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 2 x '84 Volvo 245DL | ix86,sparc,pmax |
> | http://www.jurai.net/~winter | This Space For Rent | ISO8802.5 4ever |
>
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
