From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Westphal Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC nf-next 0/3] named expressions for nf_tables Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 14:04:34 +0200 Message-ID: <20160408120434.GA6526@breakpoint.cc> References: <1459961493-7494-1-git-send-email-pablo@netfilter.org> <20160407214942.GB731@breakpoint.cc> <20160408114351.GA6869@salvia> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Florian Westphal , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Pablo Neira Ayuso Return-path: Received: from Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc ([80.244.247.6]:58434 "EHLO Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752633AbcDHMEg (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2016 08:04:36 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160408114351.GA6869@salvia> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > 2) When replacing the rule, the new expression starts from no history > as it will be a new expression, we'll be basically reseting it. You are right, I was only thinking of counter (where userspace can set packets/bytes), but limit would lose its state as most of that is internal only. So I think #2 makes sense. I have more concerns (sorry!) wrt user representation, I'll reply to this in a new email.