netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: iptables breakage WAS(Re: dummy as IMQ replacement

To: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: iptables breakage WAS(Re: dummy as IMQ replacement
From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 21:20:14 +0100
Cc: Andy Furniss <andy.furniss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Harald Welte <laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>, Remus <rmocius@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Nguyen Dinh Nam <nguyendinhnam@xxxxxxxxx>, Andre Tomt <andre@xxxxxxxx>, syrius.ml@xxxxxxxxxx, Damion de Soto <damion@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1111781443.1092.631.camel@jzny.localdomain>
References: <4241F1D2.9050202@dsl.pipex.com> <4241F7F0.2010403@dsl.pipex.com> <1111625608.1037.16.camel@jzny.localdomain> <424212F7.10106@dsl.pipex.com> <1111663947.1037.24.camel@jzny.localdomain> <1111665450.1037.27.camel@jzny.localdomain> <4242DFB5.9040802@dsl.pipex.com> <1111749220.1092.457.camel@jzny.localdomain> <42446DB2.9070809@dsl.pipex.com> <1111781443.1092.631.camel@jzny.localdomain>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
* jamal <1111781443.1092.631.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-03-25 15:10
> Things will work once the  "action track" is in place; i.e you would
> then say:
> "match xxx .. \
>  action track \
>  action connmark"
> 
> If i was to prioritize my time for new actions - how important is this?

7/10 because the meta ematch could make great use of this. Matching
on netfilter meta data is in my local tree but I guess I won't
have time to test everything in the next 2 weeks so it will probably
be too late for 2.6.12.

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