netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: dummy as IMQ replacement

To: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: dummy as IMQ replacement
From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:06:30 +0100
Cc: Hasso Tepper <hasso@xxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Nguyen Dinh Nam <nguyendinhnam@xxxxxxxxx>, Remus <rmocius@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andre Tomt <andre@xxxxxxxx>, syrius.ml@xxxxxxxxxx, Andy Furniss <andy.furniss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Damion de Soto <damion@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1107179140.7840.157.camel@jzny.localdomain>
References: <1107123123.8021.80.camel@jzny.localdomain> <200501311438.01118.hasso@estpak.ee> <1107175673.7847.130.camel@jzny.localdomain> <200501311502.56796.hasso@estpak.ee> <20050131132819.GB31837@postel.suug.ch> <1107179140.7840.157.camel@jzny.localdomain>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Yeah, that would fix it. Note however, that i am trying to highly
> discourage use of iptables and i would rather let people who use
> iptables to suffer;-> (sounds rude i know).  At some point i plan to
> remove the dependency on iptables altogether.

Heh, I think it isn't rude, giving people a little clap to join
the "good side" isn't that bad ;->

> So i am not sure whether i should encourage pushing of this patch or not ;->

I don't care that much, the patch is there, everyone can patch and
distributions can pick it up. I agree that we should remove the
dependency on iptables but I'd also like to see the dependency on the
action bits to go away at the same time.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>