From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Friedrich Lobenstock Subject: Re: question regarding iptables tuning (was Re: iptables denial of services) Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 22:44:41 +0200 Sender: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <40882EB9.7090306@fl.priv.at> References: <408167F2.9060501@fl.priv.at> <408180C7.6080302@eurodev.net> <40818C75.8010609@fl.priv.at> <4081911D.1070307@fl.priv.at> <1082234028.13261.375.camel@tux.rsn.bth.se> <4081967F.8040005@fl.priv.at> <1082235494.13261.385.camel@tux.rsn.bth.se> <20040422122301.GC1211@eychenne.org> Reply-To: Netfilter Development Mailinglist Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: To: Netfilter Development Mailinglist In-Reply-To: <20040422122301.GC1211@eychenne.org> Errors-To: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org Herve Eychenne wrote on 22.04.2004 14:23 MET: > > I've checked, and the change in hash algorithm appeared in 2.4.21. > I have updated the document accordingly. > > Here is the new version: > http://www.wallfire.org/misc/netfilter_conntrack_perf.txt > Hmmmm....."Last changes on 12/02/2003" ? PS: A BIG THANKS for that document. I has helped me a lot getting a better understanding of the matter. -- MfG / Regards Friedrich Lobenstock