From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [iptables PATCH 1/2] Add iptables support for the TPROXY target Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 11:52:00 +0200 Message-ID: <48F5BD40.8050305@trash.net> References: <200810151010.15083@nessa> <200810151022.06435@nessa> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jan Engelhardt , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: KOVACS Krisztian Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:62850 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752385AbYJOJwE (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Oct 2008 05:52:04 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200810151022.06435@nessa> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: KOVACS Krisztian wrote: > On Wednesday 15 October 2008, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >> A bit of forward planning would not have been bad; like using a >> "union nf_inet_addr laddr" for a future IPv6 expansion, since those >> pesky structs (xt_mymodule) tend be quite fixed and when they change, >> they require a new revision. > > You're right. However I don't consider adding a new revision much of a > problem when adding IPv6 support -- that is a major new feature anyway. > > But I think we're still on time: feel free to submit a patch to DaveM > which changes the kernel side as well as a patch to the iptables modules. It would be good to avoid adding more of these ugly revisions, so yeah, feel free to send patches :)