From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: xtables: add cluster match Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:42:55 +0100 Message-ID: <49A5129F.3000700@netfilter.org> References: <20090223101354.7104.45999.stgit@Decadence> <49A3FA4B.5000107@trash.net> <49A3FE90.50305@netfilter.org> <49A3FEE2.3000601@trash.net> <49A47F2B.6040704@netfilter.org> <49A4DC95.8090708@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick McHardy Return-path: Received: from mail.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:39452 "EHLO us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751736AbZBYJnL (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 04:43:11 -0500 In-Reply-To: <49A4DC95.8090708@trash.net> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Patrick McHardy wrote: > Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: >>> In case you agree, I also think "secret" would be a more fitting name. >> >> I can rename the field to "secret" in the structure or change the >> iptables cluster match option to be "--cluster-secret" instead of >> "--cluster-hash-seed" if you like. > > Its more fitting in my opinion, but I don't really care. I don't either, would you apply the patch as is now? -- "Los honestos son inadaptados sociales" -- Les Luthiers