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

[Julian Elischer]

On 4/08/2016 7:20 PM, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> On 04.08.16 06:58, Julian Elischer wrote:
>> o while thinking about states etc, it occured to me, what does THIS do
>> on subsequent packets in the session?
>>
>>
>> 10 skipto tablearg tcp from table(3) to me keep-state
> I think it will not work like you expected when you have created this
> rule :)
>
yes that's what I was thinking..

I'm guessing that the table is not evaluated due to the dynamic match 
and thus the skipto fails, either doing nothing, or dropping the 
packet (not sure which)