From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Pirko Subject: Re: [question] ipt_CLUSTERIP and address length Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 12:37:52 +0100 Message-ID: <20100225113751.GD2667@psychotron.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com> References: <20100225101257.GC2667@psychotron.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com> <4B864F9A.90207@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Patrick McHardy , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, coreteam@netfilter.org, netfilter@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Engelhardt Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:8382 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759286Ab0BYLiL (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Feb 2010 06:38:11 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:04:23PM CET, jengelh@medozas.de wrote: > >On Thursday 2010-02-25 11:23, Patrick McHardy wrote: >>Jiri Pirko wrote: >>> Hi all. >>> >>> I want to ask if there is any particular reason for ipt_CLUSTERIP >>> to support only address length of 6 (ETH_ALEN)? It seems to me >>> reasonable for this to work even with another types of network hw >>> with different addr_len. >> >>None that I'm aware of, but the length is also used in the ABI, >>so you presently can't supply larger addresses. > >The larger picture is that there seems to be quite a bit of ABI >even outside of the kernel that uses ETH_ALEN and/or ETH_HLEN >in many places; for example, the tcpdump cooked interface IIRC. Hmm, thats sad :( IMHO this should be ETH independent... > >Is there an _actual_ use case however? Is it suddenly possible >to use EUI-64s? Or a run on IPX? :-) Well for example Infiniband has 20-bytes address. But I do not know much about this kinds of hw & iptables use. I'm just looking at code and wondering :) Jirka