From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Amin Azez Subject: Re: NF structural changes (was: dangerous?) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 22:29:01 +0000 Message-ID: <45F8772D.4070401@ufomechanic.net> References: <45F8637D.3060600@trash.net> <45F870E3.6020805@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jozsef Kadlecsik , Netfilter Developer Mailing List , Jan Engelhardt , Hendrik Nordstrom To: Patrick McHardy Return-path: In-Reply-To: <45F870E3.6020805@trash.net> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org Patrick McHardy wrote: > Jan Engelhardt wrote: > >> Right. Of course this is a problem. To that end, I can really only say >> that a divide needs to be made someday. >> > > I totally disagree. iptables has tons of problems, I'm guessing that > a year from now we will have a successor. Breaking compatibility at > this point in its lifetime is not acceptable, especially on such a > fundamental level. quite likely we will come to that conclusion but our discussion might result in private patches that don't hit the kernel. > I really wish people would stop wasteing time > trying to redesign iptables, its just not worth it. > maybe, but it looks so promising coming from a position of wasting time trying to work with it :-) - and you know it's so much more fun to tweak someone elses work than start from scratch... Sam