Re: [RFC] string matching ematch

netdev

Re: [RFC] string matching ematch

To:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [RFC] string matching ematch
From:	"David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:26:09 -0800
Cc:	hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, kaber@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<20050126214119.GP31837@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References:	<20050126150714.GL31837@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050126130323.2dc10187.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050126214119.GP31837@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender:	netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 22:41:19 +0100
Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> I'm not sure if mixing stateful with stateless stuff is such of a good
> idea. I think it should be separated and have stateful filters only be
> executed when the flow matters, not packets.

I think keeping things totally stateless would be the best
idea.

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
[RFC] string matching ematch, Thomas Graf Re: [RFC] string matching ematch, David S. Miller Re: [RFC] string matching ematch, Thomas Graf Re: [RFC] string matching ematch, David S. Miller <= Re: [RFC] string matching ematch, Thomas Graf Re: [RFC] string matching ematch, Pablo Neira Re: [RFC] string matching ematch, Thomas Graf Re: [RFC] string matching ematch, jamal Re: [RFC] string matching ematch, Pablo Neira

Previous by Date:	RE: Acer Aspire 1524WLMi and RealTek 8169 - very slow, Brandeburg, Jesse
Next by Date:	Re: [PATCH 2.6]: keep fragment queues private to each user, Patrick McHardy
Previous by Thread:	Re: [RFC] string matching ematch, Thomas Graf
Next by Thread:	Re: [RFC] string matching ematch, Thomas Graf
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]