From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mart Frauenlob Subject: Re: multiport needs `-p tcp', `-p udp' - Why? Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 07:38:18 +0100 Message-ID: <4B8A0F5A.7060903@chello.at> References: <4b8984a7.0ab6660a.24bd.1f7f@mx.google.com> <4B898B4B.5050301@gatworks.com> Reply-To: netfilter@vger.kernel.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: netfilter@vger.kernel.org On 28.02.2010 05:47, netfilter-owner@vger.kernel.org wrote: > George , > > for -p option , we can specify icmp ( layer 3 protocol ) > or other layer 4 protocol other than UDP and TCP . > > I could be wrong . I am also a beginner . > > Thanks, > Ratheesh. > > > > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:44 AM, U. George wrote: >> It makes no diff to either udp or tcp - port address are at the same header >> offset. It does makes a difference if you want to test both in the rule. I >> only want to test ports with this rule. >> >> On 02/27/2010 03:46 PM, richard.horton@solstans.co.uk wrote: >> And as each rule is distinct the line with multiport does not know you have >> already determined the protocol... >> Ahhh, *But I know*. I designed the filter that way. If u want to *warn* me, >> then thats probably ok. >> -- Could you guys please stop top posting.