From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: KOVACS Krisztian Subject: Re: [nf-failover] Re: [RFC] ct_sync 0.15 (corrected) Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 09:49:26 +0200 Sender: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <41285006.2070904@sch.bme.hu> References: <1092407190.2402.120.camel@nienna.balabit> <4127EB7C.60103@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: KOVACS Krisztian , Netfilter-failover list , netfilter-devel Return-path: To: Patrick McHardy In-Reply-To: <4127EB7C.60103@trash.net> 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 Hi, Patrick McHardy wrote: > Are there any differences between the nfnetlink-ctnetlink patch and the > ctnetlink patch in the netfilter-ha repository ? Porting ctnetlink to > 2.6 would be a start. Maybe someone wants to do it, otherwise I'll do > it on a rainy day .. No, there is no difference apart from a small change I've already=20 mentioned on netfilter-devel wrt the NATINFO notification. For details, s= ee http://lists.netfilter.org/pipermail/netfilter-devel/2004-August/016225.h= tml AFAIK the ctnetlink patch has already been ported to 2.6, and a patch=20 was sent to the mailing list. Unfortunately I was unable to find that=20 mail in the mailing list archives... --=20 KOV=C1CS, Kriszti=E1n