From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Jones Subject: Re: Request: Submission of Rulesets Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 17:48:27 -0500 Message-ID: <200508241748.33613.admin@buddhalinux.com> References: <200508241314.37034.admin@buddhalinux.com> <200508241725.14260.admin@buddhalinux.com> <200508241736.45170.rob0@gmx.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200508241736.45170.rob0@gmx.co.uk> Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 24 August 2005 17:36, /dev/rob0 wrote: > > If I could remember the URL I would post it. > If you find it forward it to me. Sounds like it could be an interesting trick or two. > > Ah, *that* was the piece I was missing. You are accepting the rulesets > submitted as valid (probably) and are simply using them to test your > DTD. Is that it? I thought you were compiling it from the submitted > rulesets, and that, I guess we agree, is not possible. > Some of the targets and matches located in the extra repository have not be= en=20 introduced. These will definitely take some work. Altough progress has been= =20 made, I am sure that I have neglected various syntactical portions of the=20 netfilter framework. > > I still don't, but at least the gibberish issue is cleared up. :) =46air enough. ;) Cheers, Thomas =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDDPlAoR5cE1e/kEIRAnTvAJ9MdKaDz6DME9g7XQRhK9ZfCHq8fQCcDQJq Y9zJBZ5HNohUBV8e0eg/D7Y=3D =3Dh+/H =2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----