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

[Lev Serebryakov]

On 03.08.2016 22:08, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:

>>>> 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.
>>  Which implementation? Just curious, I could live with any, really.
> 
> This one
> https://people.freebsd.org/~ae/ipfw.diff
> 
> but with separate opcodes, I  have come to the opinion, that this will
> be more readable.
 How will it differ from my implementation, with separate opcode?

-- 
// Lev Serebryakov

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 949 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ipfw/attachments/20160803/5503266d/attachment.sig>