From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: Al Boldi <a1426z@gawab.com>
Cc: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-net@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Netfilter Development Mailinglist
<netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org>
Subject: Re: [RFD] iptables: mangle table obsoletes filter table
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 06:35:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <470EF994.4080403@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200710120031.42805.a1426z@gawab.com>
Please send mails discussing netfilter to netfilter-devel.
Al Boldi wrote:
> With the existence of the mangle table, how useful is the filter table?
>
> Other than requiring the REJECT target to be ported to the mangle table, is
> the filter table faster than the mangle table?
There are some minor differences in ordering (mangle comes before
DNAT, filter afterwards), but for most rulesets thats completely
irrelevant. The only difference that really matters is that mangle
performs rerouting in LOCAL_OUT for packets that had their routing
key changed, so its really a superset of the filter table. If you
want to use REJECT in the mangle table, you just need to remove the
restriction to filter, it works fine. I would prefer to also remove
the restriction of MARK, CONNMARK etc. to mangle, they're used for
more than just routing today so that restriction also doesn't make
much sense. Patches for this are welcome.
> If not, then shouldn't the filter table be obsoleted to avoid confusion?
That would probably confuse people. Just don't use it if you don't
need to.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-12 4:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-11 21:31 [RFD] iptables: mangle table obsoletes filter table Al Boldi
2007-10-12 4:35 ` Patrick McHardy [this message]
2007-10-12 4:39 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-10-12 5:37 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-12 11:48 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-10-12 12:25 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-12 12:31 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-10-12 13:18 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-12 13:23 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-10-12 22:56 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-17 22:37 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-17 23:24 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-20 3:40 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-20 4:47 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-10-20 11:10 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-21 4:31 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-21 4:53 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-10-23 22:27 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-10-12 13:01 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-12 13:30 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-12 13:39 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-12 13:48 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-10-12 14:02 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-12 14:03 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-10-12 22:56 ` Al Boldi
2007-10-12 23:02 ` Patrick McHardy
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-10-12 5:14 Al Boldi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=470EF994.4080403@trash.net \
--to=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=a1426z@gawab.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-net@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).