IPFIREWALL_FORWARD

[Chris St Denis]

Julian Elischer wrote:
> n j wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> although this has probably been asked before, could anyone point me to
>> some relevant information about why fwd/forward requires kernel
>> recompile, i.e. it's not been made a kernel module? This prevents me
>> from using freebsd-update and forces me to upgrade from source which -
>> even though we all like and love building from source, ofcourse :) -
>> is quite more complicated than the binary upgrade.
>>
>> Thanks,
>
> because when I first committed it I knew that as it broke some
> expected behaviour and added some instructions to the path for
> all incoming  and outgoing packets, that if I didn't make it
> an option,  I would never be allowed to commit it..
>
> since then the same reasons have continued..
> it adds several tests, not all of which are cheap,
> to the packet path.
>
> We could make is dependent on some sysctl
> or something to take out the most expensive tests..
> but we really need to look at the overall picture of 'extensions'
> and whether there is a general way to handle them.
Is there some reason why it can't just be made a loadable module?

-- 
Chris St Denis
Programmer
SmarttNet (www.smartt.com)
Ph: 604-473-9700 Ext. 200
-------------------------------------------
"Smart Internet Solutions For Businesses"