| To: | Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] MASQUERADE / policy routing ("Route send us somewhere else") |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:24:58 -0700 |
| Cc: | laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <E1C1yGT-000859-00@gondolin.me.apana.org.au> |
| References: | <20040831013841.GA5824@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> <E1C1yGT-000859-00@gondolin.me.apana.org.au> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:20:53 +1000 Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > So it would be good to know why the oif key is a bad idea. I'm OK with removing the oif check, but I'm not OK with the idea of specifying a specific output interface in the route lookup flow key here. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [RFC] MASQUERADE / policy routing ("Route send us somewhere else"), Herbert Xu |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [RFC] MASQUERADE / policy routing ("Route send us somewhere else"), Herbert Xu |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC] MASQUERADE / policy routing ("Route send us somewhere else"), Herbert Xu |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC] MASQUERADE / policy routing ("Route send us somewhere else"), Herbert Xu |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |