Subject: Re: your packet filter thang...
To: Darren Reed <darrenr@vitruvius.arbld.unimelb.EDU.AU>
From: Chris G Demetriou <Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU>
List: tech-kern
Date: 03/02/1995 06:31:15
> Anyway, if you're dead set on using BPF and sticking by that, then there's
> not much I can do/say (I concede it is a superior filter, for the purpose
> of filtering packets).

It's not a matter of being "dead set" on anything; i'm somewhat
well-known in some circles for criticizing code from LBL, and have no
strong attachment to BPF.  8-)

The point is, if, as you say, BPF is a superior filter, _i_ would
think that it would therefore be appropriate to use BPF for gateway
filtering.  Until it's determined that it's appropriate to use an
"inferior" (!!) filter for gateway packet filtering, then i'm hesitant
to add another packet filter to the kernel.

In my previous mail, i think i examined a reasonable way to implement
it.  If anybody would like to discuss that in more detail, then i'd be
happy to, privately.

> I would add, at this point, that if NetBSD is going to (strongly) stick
> by BPF then it look closely at incorporating libpcap into the release.
> I'm sure Charles is familiar with it, and from what I've seen of it so
> far, it will make further use of BPF easier/more encouraging.

I believe (though i cannot say authoritatively) that someone is
working on that.