From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
Cc: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, netdev@oss.sgi.com,
netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 3/5]: netfilter+ipsec - input hooks
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:17:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <405B1D1A.6050700@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040318221523.07298f03.davem@redhat.com>
David S. Miller wrote:
>
> Be careful! xfrm4_tunnel handles both uncompressed ipcomp packets
> _and_ IPIP encapsulator device packets. Yet you will intepret usage
> of the ipprot as 'xfrm_prot==1' in all cases.
>
> Yes this is ugly... if we added some kind of flag bit-mask to sk_buff,
> would that allow an easier implementation?
>
I can't imagine how. Best would be to avoid the xfrm_prot flag
completely. Maybe we can add a flag to xfrm_state which indicates
that this is the last xfrm specified in the policy ?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-19 16:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-08 11:03 ip_route_me_harder -> xfrm_lookup Herbert Xu
2004-03-08 14:46 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-03-08 19:58 ` David S. Miller
2004-03-18 16:31 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-03-18 16:31 ` [RFC, PATCH 1/5]: netfilter+ipsec - nf_reset Patrick McHardy
2004-03-19 6:08 ` David S. Miller
2004-03-18 16:31 ` [RFC, PATCH 2/5]: netfilter+ipsec - output hooks Patrick McHardy
2004-03-19 6:09 ` David S. Miller
2004-03-19 10:59 ` Herbert Xu
2004-03-20 21:45 ` Alexander Samad
2004-03-18 16:32 ` [RFC, PATCH 3/5]: netfilter+ipsec - input hooks Patrick McHardy
2004-03-19 6:15 ` David S. Miller
2004-03-19 11:47 ` Herbert Xu
2004-03-19 16:17 ` Patrick McHardy [this message]
2004-03-19 21:05 ` Herbert Xu
2004-03-19 11:07 ` Herbert Xu
2004-03-19 11:46 ` Herbert Xu
2004-03-19 16:29 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-03-18 16:32 ` [RFC, PATCH 4/5]: netfilter+ipsec - policy lookup Patrick McHardy
2004-03-19 6:16 ` David S. Miller
2004-03-19 15:30 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-03-19 11:51 ` Herbert Xu
2004-03-19 16:34 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-03-19 21:05 ` Herbert Xu
2004-03-20 14:01 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-03-21 6:35 ` Herbert Xu
2004-03-21 22:16 ` Herbert Xu
2004-03-21 23:34 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-03-22 2:03 ` Herbert Xu
2004-03-22 2:29 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-03-24 2:15 ` Alexander Samad
2004-03-24 2:39 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-03-24 3:33 ` Alexander Samad
2004-03-18 16:32 ` [RFC, PATCH 5/5]: netfilter+ipsec - policy checks Patrick McHardy
2004-03-19 6:19 ` David S. Miller
2004-03-19 6:31 ` Alexander Samad
2004-03-20 5:58 ` Alexander Samad
2004-03-20 15:58 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-03-19 16:24 ` Patrick McHardy
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=405B1D1A.6050700@trash.net \
--to=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org \
/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.