netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

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

To: Andy Furniss <andy.furniss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: iptables breakage WAS(Re: dummy as IMQ replacement
From: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 24 Mar 2005 06:32:27 -0500
Cc: Harald Welte <laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>, Remus <rmocius@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Nguyen Dinh Nam <nguyendinhnam@xxxxxxxxx>, Andre Tomt <andre@xxxxxxxx>, syrius.ml@xxxxxxxxxx, Damion de Soto <damion@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <424212F7.10106@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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> <423F41AD.3010902@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1111444869.1072.51.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <423F71C2.8040802@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1111462263.1109.6.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <42408998.5000202@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1111550254.1089.21.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4241C478.5030309@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1111607112.1072.48.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4241D764.2030306@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1111612042.1072.53.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4241F1D2.9050202@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4241F7F0.2010403@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1111625608.1037.16.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <424212F7.10106@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 20:08, Andy Furniss wrote:
> jamal wrote:
> > Never mind, I have reproduced this as well. It doesnt happen in all
> > targets it seems - just some. 
> 
> Whoo - I was starting to think it was me being lame somehow :-)

I can confirm your sanity ;->

Ok, I have figured the cause fatale at least - some targets have
multiple versions. MARK happens to be one of those. The reason TOS and
others worked is because they only have one version.

What happens when you go looking for the target is you get the new
version as a default ;-> I think the default should be to get the old
version so old binaries continue to work.
I believe you may have to go explicitly go and ask for the old version
or you may have to do something funky to get the new version passed to
the kernel.

Need caffeine, I think i will find some workaround - I should probably
put it in user space.

cheers,
jamal



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