In some email I received from Andrew Brown, sie wrote:
> >> it seems to me that i want all the semantics of "pass" (ie, "quick"
> >> short circuits and optional "log") but also the byte counts.  is there
> >> an easier way to do what i'm trying to do?
> >
> >Accounting rules are processed separately from access control rules.
> >
> >If you had:
> >
> >count in blah
> >block in blah
> >count in foo
> >pass in bar
> >
> >the actual order of application is:
> >
> >count in blah
> >count in foo
> >
> >block in blah
> >pass in bar
> 
> ah.  ok.  that clears it up a little for me.
> 
> so (if you'll bear with me) a count line that has a quick on it will
> terminate accounting processing and jump straight to access
> processing?

Yes

> hmm...so i actually need a "pass quick" line with each "count quick"
> line?  and is there some reason that "count log" seems not to work?
> or is that simply not done?

depending on what you want to achieve here.

"count log" does not do what you think it does because it doesn't seem
logical, to me, to be logging packet information based on accounting.

Darren