From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Whitcroft Subject: Re: Difference between match and target Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 09:42:44 +0100 Sender: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <4231865.1056706964@blackhawk> References: <20030624170402.8564.54425.Mailman@kashyyyk> <005301c33ae3$141da460$010f430a@elitecore7> <20030625091005.GH2645@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org Return-path: To: Harald Welte , Sumit Pandya In-Reply-To: <20030625091005.GH2645@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> Content-Disposition: inline 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 --On 25 June 2003 11:10 +0200 Harald Welte wrote: > btw: you can do this now (having match and target in one kernel module, > registering as match and target - but this would break iptables > module-on-demand-loading code). Where should iptables know from, that > when the user specifies '-m foo' it should load a kernel module called > 'ipt_BAR.o' ? I guess we could say that this could be placed in the modules configuration. Are not aliases in modules.conf used for exactly this kind of thing for instance when probing for eth0? That said it would add a significant maintenance overhead to keep the netfilter specific aliases in sync with the kernel. Given that if you care about 1 page you likely should not be using modules anyhow its likely not worth the effort. Cheers. -apw