From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] iptables: accept multiple IP address specifications for -s, -d Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 08:53:20 +0200 Message-ID: <4A2A1260.7050207@netfilter.org> References: <1244229955-27642-1-git-send-email-jengelh@medozas.de> <1244229955-27642-2-git-send-email-jengelh@medozas.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kaber@trash.net, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Engelhardt Return-path: Received: from mail.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:50862 "EHLO mail.us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750879AbZFFGyT (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Jun 2009 02:54:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1244229955-27642-2-git-send-email-jengelh@medozas.de> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Jan, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > From: Michael Granzow > > 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