From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] netfilter: Added vlan matching extension Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 14:35:50 +0200 Message-ID: <20150527123550.GA19737@salvia> References: <1432586250-42147-1-git-send-email-eddi@guardicore.com> <20150525215108.GH3629@breakpoint.cc> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Florian Westphal , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Eddi Linder Return-path: Received: from mail.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:41251 "EHLO mail.us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751015AbbE0Mas (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2015 08:30:48 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 05:24:56PM +0300, Eddi Linder wrote: [...] > Yes, I do plan to use it with a bridge, but I don't think ebtables is > the proper solution, as I'd like to be able to use the matches and the > targets provided by the iptables extensions. If we follow this path, we'll open the door to get more patches to bloat iptables with features that actually belong to the bridge family, just because you don't want to use ebtables for this. We have the chance to resolve this situation from nf_tables. Sorry, I'm not applying this.