From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: ROUTE patch Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:33:18 +0100 Message-ID: <49A4133E.4070703@trash.net> References: <49A3F922.4050508@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Abhishek Singh , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Engelhardt Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:35708 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754631AbZBXPdW (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Feb 2009 10:33:22 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Tuesday 2009-02-24 14:41, Patrick McHardy wrote: >> Jan Engelhardt wrote: >>> On Tuesday 2009-02-24 09:59, Abhishek Singh wrote: >>>> What I would like to know is that if someone would like to add it to >>>> the main iptables tree and the patchomatic repository. I am not sure >>>> how to go about it. If someone is interested, please let me know. I >>>> shall contribute the code and if would be happy to incorporate review >>>> comments by other developers. >>> [omg timeline!] >>> >>> Short answer, no. There is iproute2 and xt_TEE which replace it, >>> and even patchomatic is gone. >>> >>> [/me takes a leap forward] >> Perhaps we can finally get this merged. IIRC the only reason against >> it is the IP layer duplication instead of simply using dst_output(). >> > It cannot use dst_output because that would cause reentrancy into iptablse. > Want a patch, though? I would like to have a look at the current patch, yes. Don't bother fixing anything though, I mainly want to have a look at the routing part.