Re: [PATCH 1/1] Re: dangerous? Setting mark in nat table

[Roberto Nibali <ratz@drugphish.ch>]

>>> just spewing ideas at this time. As Patrick I do not consider the core
>>> iptables worth the effort of such redesign and if redesigning stuff then
>>> something significantly better should be done. nf-HiPAC is one possible
>>> alternative where a lot is done much smarter even if communication
>>> between the projects is pretty distant at the moment.
>>
>> Speaking of HiPAC, when is it going to be merged? IIRC the merge was
>> discussed at the netfilter workshop 2005 with the goal to merge it in
>> 2.6.16. Has this decision been overturned/revised/forgotten or was
>> the report I read about that netfilter workshop inaccurate?
> 
> Unfortunately the discussion pretty much came to a halt over a year
> ago because of some disagreements. I still consider merging it a
> good idea, but since there is no progress in this area I will start
> working on a netlink based iptables replacement myself in the next
> months.

Cough ... could we guys over at ../ipv4/ipvs/ synchronise with your 
ideas? I've once started a port of IPVS to the netlink framework 
together with Thomas Graf, but stopped the project because I didn't find 
enough time. I'll be offline for at least one year soon but my fellow 
hackers (Horms at the moment) over at IPVS sure would like to combine 
efforts; maybe we can even completely integrate IPVS into the new (fast 
and memory-efficient like nf-hipac) netfilter framework and share the 
netlink code in user space with regards to iptables and ipvsadm.

Best regards,
Roberto Nibali, ratz
-- 
echo 
'[q]sa[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb3135071790101768542287578439snlbxq' | dc