Re: [PATCH] netfilter: xtables: inclusion of xt_condition

[Luciano Coelho <luciano.coelho@nokia.com>]

On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 13:20 +0200, ext Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Friday 2010-07-16 13:10, Luciano Coelho wrote:
> >Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de> writes:
> >> On Thursday 2010-04-22 13:14, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> >> 
> >> > This looks better, thanks. A few remaining questions about things
> >> > I missed previously:
> >> 
> >> Will deal with it shortly.
> >
> >Are you planning to resend this patch with the changes Patrick
> >suggested?
> 
> I can try.

Cool, thanks!


> >As you may have seen in my earlier rfc email, I'm interested in
> >something similar to the condition match.  I'm not sure whether the best
> >approach is to create a CONDITION target where we can set the condition
> >variable in the iptables itself or if it is better to create a new
> >"variable match" and an accompanying "VARIABLE target" that keeps the
> >variables in memory, instead of using procfs.
> 
> procfs is in memory :)

Yes, of course, but I meant without exporting it to procfs. ;) That
would probably make the code a lot simpler (actually I can't imagine a
simpler match/target than a "variable" match/target ;)


-- 
Cheers,
Luca.