| To: | jmorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] LSM networking update: summary (0/5) |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 08 Feb 2003 00:44:40 -0800 (PST) |
| Cc: | Makan.Pourzandi@xxxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-security-module@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.44.0302081002400.9462-100000@blackbird.intercode.com.au> |
| References: | <7B2A7784F4B7F0409947481F3F3FEF8305CC9531@eammlex037.lmc.ericsson.se> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0302081002400.9462-100000@blackbird.intercode.com.au> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
From: James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 10:10:44 +1100 (EST) As mentioned during the last week, the current set of network hooks will not directly support explicitly labeled networking. Why not? I thought we had completely established that anything the socket receive SKB hook could not handle would be implementable via netfilter. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] LSM networking update: summary (0/5), David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: skb_padto and small fragmented transmits, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: [PATCH] LSM networking update: summary (0/5), James Morris |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] LSM networking update: summary (0/5), James Morris |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |