netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
Cc: kaber@trash.net, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] iptables: accept multiple IP address specifications for -s, -d
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 08:53:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A2A1260.7050207@netfilter.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1244229955-27642-2-git-send-email-jengelh@medozas.de>

Hi Jan,

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> From: Michael Granzow <mgranzow@zeus.com>
> 
> libiptc already supports adding and deleting multiple rules with
> different addresses, so it only needs to be wired up to the options.
> 
> 	# ip6tables -I INPUT -s 2001:db8::d,2001:db8::e -j DROP
> 
> References: http://marc.info/?l=netfilter-devel&m=123929790719202&w=2

I think this is handy for users so I can find it useful.

The only concern that I have with this is that it changes the existing
1:1 mapping between commands and iptables rules. I mean, people may get
confused because of this "rule expansion" feature, they may think that
we natively support layer 3 address sets? Probably it's a matter of
documenting this.

I'd like to know what Patrick thinks about this anyway.

Just a minor nitpick:

> +Multiple addresses can be specified when, but this will \fBreplicate\fP the
                                       ^^^^
This sentence is incomplete? I suggest to refer to the rule expansion
feature.

> +rule (when adding with \-A), or will cause multiple rules to be
> +deleted (with \-D).

-- 
"Los honestos son inadaptados sociales" -- Les Luthiers

  reply	other threads:[~2009-06-06  6:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-06-05 19:25 iptables: pull request June-05 Jan Engelhardt
2009-06-05 19:25 ` [PATCH 1/3] iptables: accept multiple IP address specifications for -s, -d Jan Engelhardt
2009-06-06  6:53   ` Pablo Neira Ayuso [this message]
2009-06-06 11:16     ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-06-07 21:12       ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2009-06-08 13:50     ` Patrick McHardy
2009-06-10 12:16       ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-06-10 12:19         ` Patrick McHardy
2009-06-25 17:08         ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-07-16 14:24           ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-07-17 14:31             ` Patrick McHardy
2009-07-17 15:55               ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-06-05 19:25 ` [PATCH 2/3] DNAT/SNAT: add manpage documentation for --persistent flag Jan Engelhardt
2009-06-08 13:46   ` Patrick McHardy
2009-06-05 19:25 ` [PATCH 3/3] extensions: remove redundant casts Jan Engelhardt
2009-06-08 13:47   ` Patrick McHardy
2009-06-08 13:45 ` iptables: pull request June-05 Patrick McHardy

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4A2A1260.7050207@netfilter.org \
    --to=pablo@netfilter.org \
    --cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
    --cc=kaber@trash.net \
    --cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).