From: Roberto Nibali <ratz@drugphish.ch>
To: Xose Vazquez Perez <xose@wanadoo.es>
Cc: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org
Subject: Re: when IPVS into netfilter?
Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 13:29:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3EBCE288.5020801@drugphish.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3EB44BE7.3070602@wanadoo.es
Hello,
I hope the netfilter people do not mind if I answer this on behalf of
the LVS project.
> Are there some possibility to IPVS Netfilter
> ( http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org )
> module for it can go into iptable 2.4.xx code?
I think not for 2.4.x because we're changing too much of the
netfilter/routing code to make it a smooth and acceptable merge. There
is also some code most people use which is completely not acceptable
within the scope of routing extensions (like the hidden patch or some
DGD code).
For 2.5 it is already too late, feature freeze was already called in and
we haven't talked to the netfilter people anyways ;).
I'm going to talk to Harald about it this coming OLS (once again),
provided he's got enough time. It's on my BoF list actually; for more
information please check out the .plan:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-virtual-server&m=104756133813089&w=2
Another point is that we (Wensong the most) never felt the urge to
submit the code to the networking maintainers for approval and
inclusion. At OLS 2000, Wensong, Horms, Rusty, me and some others talked
about a possible inclusion of LVS into netfilter. It simply never
happened because noone felt about doing more than talking of it.
Yet another point is that we never really agreed on having someone being
the lead developer and responsible for a possible kernel inclusion and
most of us simply do not have the time to be a maintainer. It's a tough
and time consuming job even if the code works for 99.999% of the people.
You have to talk to other involved parties, you have to monitor API
changes and you will need to be responsive to an increasing amount of
emails addressed directly to you (for example package responsibles for a
distribution), because you're in the MAINTAINERS list.
Last but not least it is pretty easy to patch your kernel with LVS,
There are as few as possible changes to the existing code, most of the
patch is in form of additional code.
> --
> Galiza nin perdoa nin esquence. Governo demision!
:) Fair enough.
Best regards,
Roberto Nibali, ratz
--
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb3135071790101768542287578439snlbxq'|dc
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-05-10 11:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-03 23:08 when IPVS into netfilter? Xose Vazquez Perez
2003-05-10 11:29 ` Roberto Nibali [this message]
2003-05-11 20:04 ` Xose Vazquez Perez
2003-05-20 7:42 ` Roberto Nibali
2003-05-20 15:26 ` Xose Vazquez Perez
2003-05-23 19:52 ` dropping support for ipfwadm/ipchains (Re: when IPVS into netfilter?) Harald Welte
2003-05-23 21:11 ` Roberto Nibali
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3EBCE288.5020801@drugphish.ch \
--to=ratz@drugphish.ch \
--cc=netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org \
--cc=xose@wanadoo.es \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.