From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Weinberger Subject: Re: Netfilter: New target: RLOG Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:29:31 +0100 Message-ID: <4F17E27B.8070308@linutronix.de> References: <1326926610-17830-1-git-send-email-rw@linutronix.de> <20120119091248.GA32391@1984> <20120119092533.GA32602@1984> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org To: Pablo Neira Ayuso Return-path: Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:56086 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756561Ab2ASJ3d (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jan 2012 04:29:33 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20120119092533.GA32602@1984> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 19.01.2012 10:25, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:12:48AM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: >> I still think this can be useful. >> >> But, why don't you add this to the LOG target as an extension instead >> of yet another target? > > By "extension", I meant to say "revision". > > If you're not familiar with the iptables revision mechanism, for > instance, have a look at net/netfilter/xt_NFQUEUE.c > > Look for the "revision" pattern in that code. Basicaly, it allows you > to enhance existing matches/targets without breaking backward > compatibility. Okay, will look and send new patches. :-) Thanks, //richard