From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH] MASQUERADE handling of device events Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 17:24:52 +0100 Message-ID: <418F9DD4.20202@trash.net> References: <20041107181825.GA3522@linuxace.com> <418F9952.5030004@trash.net> <20041108161511.GA6754@linuxace.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org, linux-net@vger.kernel.org Return-path: To: Phil Oester In-Reply-To: <20041108161511.GA6754@linuxace.com> Sender: linux-net-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org Phil Oester wrote: >On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 05:05:38PM +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: > >>But without the ifindex comparison, a situation like this can happen: >> >>ppp0 goes down >>ppp1 goes down >>ppp0 comes up again, same IP as before >>ppp1 connections get killed >>ppp1 comes up again >> >>So we should keep this. >> > >But ifindex is meaningless on ppp interfaces - it is incremented on each >cycle. So there is no way to say that the original ppp1 is the same >interface as the new ppp1. > >ifindex just cannot be used reliably. > Of course, I wasn't thinking :) Then what about Henrik's suggestion, replacing masq_index by a new status bit ? Regards Patrick