Re: iptables u32 match code for review/testing/...

[Roberto Nibali <ratz@tac.ch>]

>  > I like the content (code/implementation/idea of having u32).
>  > The only issue is that it doesn't really fit into the current iptables
>  > architecture. Why?
>  > 	- because it is a whole classification engine on it's own
> Why is this bad?  I wrote it to do things I wanted to do but didn't
> see how.  I think that's good.  If it subsumes a few others that are
> out there, even better.  (But it's almost certainly a lot slower than 
> any more specialized match, so they're still useful.)

What's wrong with: http://www.cyberus.ca/~hadi/patches/action/ ?
Why couldn't you use some of its code for the classification engine?

> But if you do want wide indentation (and don't mind >80 cols)
> then here you go:

Looks a lot nicer and ledgible to me but I'm not the one in position to 
criticise coding style.

Best regards,
Roberto Nibali, ratz
-- 
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb3135071790101768542287578439snlbxq' | dc