From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: nftables add vs replace Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 08:54:40 +0000 Message-ID: <20140122085440.GA30195@macbook.localnet> References: <20140121110645.GC25197@macbook.localnet> <20140121112700.GA21772@localhost> <20140121114524.GA27552@macbook.localnet> <20140122083811.GA4228@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Arturo Borrero Gonzalez , Netfilter Development Mailing list To: Pablo Neira Ayuso Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:47344 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751805AbaAVIyo (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jan 2014 03:54:44 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140122083811.GA4228@localhost> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 09:38:11AM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:45:25AM +0000, Patrick McHardy wrote: > [...] > > I think the semantics of "flush table" should be changed though. It should > > kill *every* object in the table. Perhaps not the base chains, but at least > > all rules, non base chain and also sets. > > I think we need to add a new flush operation with the new semantics > and keep the old one, at least the compat layer needs a flush > operation that leaves all chain objects intact to imitate iptables -F. How about: flush table: flushes everything, removes chains and sets flush chains: flushes rules within all chains (iptables -F) flush chain: flushes rules within a chain