From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mr Dash Four Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] ipset: change 'iface' part in hash:net,iface set Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:52:40 +0100 Message-ID: <50088FB8.6030503@googlemail.com> References: <4FFCBDB8.9080101@googlemail.com> <4FFF6EF2.6010108@googlemail.com> <5000293F.4030901@googlemail.com> <50002F3F.5020408@googlemail.com> <5001678C.6000505@googlemail.com> <5002AF68.9070204@googlemail.com> <5002F0AF.4000502@googlemail.com> <500340DF.6070207@googlemail.com> <50040B6A.608@googlemail.com> <5005F552.9060301@googlemail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Netfilter Core Team , Pablo Neira Ayuso , Patrick McHardy To: Jozsef Kadlecsik Return-path: Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:37051 "EHLO mail-wg0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751966Ab2GSWwr (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jul 2012 18:52:47 -0400 Received: by wgbdr13 with SMTP id dr13so2953036wgb.1 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 15:52:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5005F552.9060301@googlemail.com> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: >> is perfectly fine and logical. We circled again and I'm fed up. >> > So? I fail to see where I have contradicted myself (if that was indeed > your intention to show me when you sent the above) or how the above is > wrong, but please feel free to elaborate if you so wish. Care to enlighten me as to how did we "circled again" or is this another case of you throwing allegations around when you get cornered?