Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list netdev); Mon, 24 Feb 2003 06:37:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from coruscant.gnumonks.org (mail@coruscant.franken.de [193.174.159.226]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with SMTP id h1OEbi3v021785 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 06:37:46 -0800 Received: from sunbeam-tap0.de.gnumonks.org ([192.168.200.2] helo=sunbeam.gnumonks.org) by coruscant.gnumonks.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 3.34 #1) id 18nJsU-0005hx-00; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 15:46:47 +0100 Received: from laforge by sunbeam.gnumonks.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1) id 18nJnA-0002Lo-00; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 15:41:16 +0100 Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 15:41:16 +0100 From: Harald Welte To: jamal Cc: Erik Hensema , Harald Welte , netdev@oss.sgi.com, Netfilter Development Mailinglist Subject: Re: RFC: promote netfilter MARK value from IPv6 packets to sit packets Message-ID: <20030224144116.GN24960@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> Mail-Followup-To: Harald Welte , jamal , Erik Hensema , netdev@oss.sgi.com, Netfilter Development Mailinglist References: <20030217145727.GA3413@hensema.net> <20030223193339.GD15385@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> <20030223234225.GA23556@hensema.net> <20030224083946.H34066@shell.cyberus.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="lYetfuAxy9ic4HK3" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030224083946.H34066@shell.cyberus.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-Operating-System: Linux sunbeam 2.4.20-nfpom X-Date: Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 54th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3169 X-archive-position: 1793 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: laforge@netfilter.org Precedence: bulk X-list: netdev --lYetfuAxy9ic4HK3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 08:41:10AM -0500, jamal wrote: > If this is to be a config option, it should not be restricted to > netfilter specifics but rather skb specifics. Example the tcindex > (maybe even the cb) etc. No problem with me. I do understand the usefulness of tcindex, but what would a totally different protcol (or the user) do with the cb of a different protocol? > cheers, > jamal --=20 - Harald Welte http://www.netfilter.org/ =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D "Fragmentation is like classful addressing -- an interesting early architectural error that shows how much experimentation was going on while IP was being designed." -- Paul Vixie --lYetfuAxy9ic4HK3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE+Wi8MXaXGVTD0i/8RAmfCAJsGL4Ga6R62Yezoj1HCJWC58wWR5gCfcEsv 1Bm/rI31ua78Rs9d20eNLfw= =mrzP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --lYetfuAxy9ic4HK3--