Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762610AbXJQXP7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:15:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759661AbXJQXPn (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:15:43 -0400 Received: from mail.tmr.com ([64.65.253.246]:50675 "EHLO gaimboi.tmr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757493AbXJQXPl (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:15:41 -0400 Message-ID: <471699A0.3060303@tmr.com> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:24:16 -0400 From: Bill Davidsen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.8) Gecko/20061105 SeaMonkey/1.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Davidsen CC: Al Boldi , Patrick McHardy , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-net@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFD] iptables: mangle table obsoletes filter table References: <200710120031.42805.a1426z@gawab.com> <470EF994.4080403@trash.net> <200710120837.18152.a1426z@gawab.com> <47168EA1.1080300@tmr.com> In-Reply-To: <47168EA1.1080300@tmr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1451 Lines: 34 Bill Davidsen wrote: >>>> If not, then shouldn't the filter table be obsoleted to avoid >>>> confusion? >>> That would probably confuse people. Just don't use it if you don't >>> need to. >> > That is a most practical suggestion. > >> The problem is that people think they are safe with the filter table, >> when in fact they need the prerouting chain to seal things. Right now >> this is only possible in the mangle table. >> > I'm not sure what you think is unsafe about using the filter table, and > the order of evaluation issues certainly seem to suggest that some > actions would take a major rethink at least. Perhaps you could avoid > breaking all of the setups which currently work, rather than force > everyone to do things differently because you feel that your way is better. > It was my intention to suggest that unintentional breakage of existing setups should be avoided, not that removing the filter table was some evil plot. ;-) On rereading my original post I failed to make that clear, please take it as intended. -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/