[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PF and "route-to"
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 11:56:18AM +1000, Darren Reed wrote:
> Why not just add another mbuf tag type which is a "pf-routed" tag and just
> call pf_test() from pf_route() ? Or is that too much overhead to check for
> before calling pf_route() ? Or is there some other design limitation I'm
> not seeing ?
What would the tag be needed for? To prevent dup-to loops? Otherwise the
slight reentrancy pf_test()->pf_route()->pf_test() wouldn't be much of a
problem, just a question of properly placing the pf_test() call inside
pf_route(), with regard to the route lookup, etc.
I'll try it, you're welcome to send a patch, too :)