Monday, January 5, 2004, 11:47:52 PM, you wrote: CB> Alexey E. Suslikov wrote:
>>>i can't find the discussion with daniel, where he pointed out: >>>"this is the pf.conf manual page issue in saying: >>> >>> >> >>here is the daniel's message >>http://www.benzedrine.cx/pf/msg02982.html >> >> CB> Quoting from that message: CB> But it's not entirely true, either, as state entries are not really CB> bound to an interface (only to the direction). Not yet, at least, as it CB> would have some advantages making it worth changing. CB> "Yet" has come. Now you can bind them if you wish. CB> Cedric i just thinking about a) resurrection of state machine theory in pf.conf manual or some other place (paper?); b) uncomfortableness for people, who wants to have bunch of rules "stated" differently from their "state policy" default, instead of just constructing more hacking-proofing ruleset.
