Re: [rfc] using xor in mark targets

[Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>]

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Dec 3 2007 16:09, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>> Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>>> I was asking what name I should give to the option that enables
>>> "new-style" handling (origmark & ~mask ^ val):
>>>
>>>  --set-extended-mark val/mask
>>>
>>> because it is not sooo extended after all, just a different notation of what
>>> libxt_MARK takes right now.
>> Why not simply "--and-mark", "--or-mark", "--xor-mark", ...?
>>
> Alright, I just saw that MARK will remain compatible to my plans.
> But it concerns CONNMARK. See this patch, which introduces --set-xmark.
> 
> Assumes a xt_CONNMARK.ko v2 that does:
> --set:
> 	ctmark = (ctmark & info->ctmark_mask) ^ info->ctmark_value;
> --save:
> 	ctmark = (nfmark & info->nfmark_mask) ^ (ctmark & info->ctmark_mask);
> --restore:
> 	nfmark = (nfmark & info->nfmark_mask) ^ (ctmark & info->ctmark_mask);
> 
> 
> As you can see, it would introduce a new option "--set-xmark", and
> that name does not sound as appalling as --set-mark, so I was looking
> for a better one ;-)


It would be easier for me if you'd explain what every option does,
especially why you need this set-xmark option.