netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

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

To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: iptables breakage WAS(Re: dummy as IMQ replacement
From: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 22 Mar 2005 23:01:56 -0500
Cc: Andy Furniss <andy.furniss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Harald Welte <laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Remus <rmocius@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Nguyen Dinh Nam <nguyendinhnam@xxxxxxxxx>, Andre Tomt <andre@xxxxxxxx>, syrius.ml@xxxxxxxxxx, Damion de Soto <damion@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Netfilter Development Mailinglist <netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <4240C70E.8060503@xxxxxxxxx>
Organization: jamalopolous
References: <1107123123.8021.80.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <0fcf01c5077f$579e4b80$6e69690a@RIMAS> <1107174142.8021.121.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <00c301c524b4$938cd240$6e69690a@RIMAS> <1110379135.1091.143.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1110416767.1111.76.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <025501c52552$2dbf87c0$6e69690a@RIMAS> <1110453757.1108.87.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <423B7BCB.10400@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1111410890.1092.195.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4240C70E.8060503@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 20:31, Patrick McHardy wrote:

> We'll try to keep this in mind in the future. We could move
> the version field to the end, but I guess its already too
> late. What do you think?
> 

I think its ok for now - we'll say if you want to use ipt you have to
use iptables 1.3.1 and above.
Just keep me in mind in the future. Like i suggested a while back
since i am ripping code off iptables anyways. if that code gets
modularized and in a library then the maintainance of this should be
easier.

cheers,
jamal


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