IPFW: more "orthogonal? state operations, push into 11?

[Andrey V. Elsukov]

On 02.08.16 09:47, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Do we have any movement on these improvements?
> even similar functionality by different names is ok.
> 
> 1/ ability to use keep-state without an implicit check-state. <--- most
> important for me. (store-state)?
> 2/ ability to keep-state without actually doing it <---- less important
> for me.


So, if there are nobody against, I plan to commit this part in a several
days.

> 3/ multiple state tables? this was discussed and I thought I saw patches
> but I haven't seen it going in,  <-- super luxurious

AFAIR, this was a part of "per-interface firewall" patch from eri@ and I
think it is mostly outdated now, because in head/ we did very complex
changes in ipfw.

-- 
WBR, Andrey V. Elsukov

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 559 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ipfw/attachments/20160803/81176aa0/attachment.sig>