From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: RFC: net 00/05: routing based send-to-self implementation Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:32:30 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20091130175529.7555.10132.sendpatchset@x2.localnet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick McHardy Return-path: Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:45403 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752150AbZK3Tc3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:32:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20091130175529.7555.10132.sendpatchset@x2.localnet> (Patrick McHardy's message of "Mon\, 30 Nov 2009 18\:55\:30 +0100 \(MET\)") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Patrick McHardy writes: > These patches are yet another attempt at adding "send-to-self" functionality, > allowing to send packets between two local interfaces over the wire. Unlike > the approaches I've seen so far, this one is purely routing based. > Especially the oif classification should also be useful for different setups. Why not put each physical interface in a different network namespace? That should work with no changes today. Eric