From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2019 10:43:15 +0200 From: Florian Westphal Message-ID: <20190831084315.GU20113@breakpoint.cc> References: <20190830181354.26279-1-leonardo@linux.ibm.com> <20190830181354.26279-3-leonardo@linux.ibm.com> <20190830205541.GR20113@breakpoint.cc> <2ba876f9ad6597e640df68f09659dce3c4b5ce03.camel@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2ba876f9ad6597e640df68f09659dce3c4b5ce03.camel@linux.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [Bridge] [PATCH v4 2/2] net: br_netfiler_hooks: Drops IPv6 packets if IPv6 module is not loaded List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Leonardo Bras Cc: Nikolay Aleksandrov , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Roopa Prabhu , bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, Florian Westphal , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jozsef Kadlecsik , coreteam@netfilter.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , Pablo Neira Ayuso Leonardo Bras wrote: > > There are two solutions: > > 1. The above patch, but use NF_ACCEPT instead > > 2. keep the DROP, but move it below the call_ip6tables test, > > so that users can tweak call-ip6tables to accept packets. > > Q: Does 2 mean that it will only be dropped if bridge intents to use > host's ip6tables? Else, it will be accepted by previous if? Yes, thats the idea: Let users decide if ipv6.disable or call-ip6tables is more important to them.