From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 04:17:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 04:17:40 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:32139 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 04:17:40 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 01:15:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20021024.011512.08605370.davem@redhat.com> To: laforge@gnumonks.org Cc: bart.de.schuymer@pandora.be, coreteam@netfilter.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, buytenh@gnu.org Subject: Re: [netfilter-core] [RFC] place to put bridge-netfilter specific data in the skbuff From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <20021024101656.T2450@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> References: <200210141953.38933.bart.de.schuymer@pandora.be> <200210142159.49290.bart.de.schuymer@pandora.be> <20021024101656.T2450@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> X-FalunGong: Information control. X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Harald Welte Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 10:16:56 +0200 Mh. Since bridging firewall is cool, but not something everybody will use by default [and it adds code as well as enlarges the skb], I think it should be a compiletime kernel config option. This was my initial reaction, but both of us misunderstand what is going on I think. If you use bridging, using netfilter on the bridged traffic "is not possible" without these bridge-netfilter changes. So he's saying, if we have bridging enable and netfilter, should bridge-netfilter be on, and right now I say yes. Bart, correct me if I'm wrong.