Subject: Re: ipfw (ala BSD/OS) and why it was cool
To: Peter Seebach <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Steven M. Bellovin <email@example.com>
Date: 12/20/2004 17:38:59
In message <200412202226.iBKMQAbJ018976@guild.plethora.net>, Peter Seebach writ
>So, BSD/OS had a thing called ipfw, which was totally unlike FreeBSD's.
>It had a couple of major features.
>One was that it had an actual language, complete with nested conditionals,
>which compiled to moderately optimized BPF code.
>Another was that it had multiple points at which a filter could be applied.
>So, instead of writing a single unified filter which has to take all
>circumstances into account, you could write multiple filters.
>Filters could go at any of the following points:
> pre-input (the raw wire seeing a packet)
> input (a packet is actually directed to this machine)
> forward (a packet is being forwarded)
> output (a packet has been generated by this machine)
> pre-output (a packet is about to hit the actual wire)
>(The last name is confusing.)
>So far as I can tell, none of the existing tools (ipfilter, PF, FreeBSD's
>ipfw) are as cool as this was.
>So... I doubt Wind River is going to let that code go anytime soon, but I'm
>wondering, would people be interested in this? It's actually not that much
>work, once you've had the ideas. The flexibility makes it possible to easily
>write filters which are at least hard, and maybe even impossible, with some
>of the other filtering tools out there.
Count me as interested.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb