From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Feizhou Subject: Re: Large number of repeated rules with only differing -s ipaddrs/cidrs Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 22:36:39 +0800 Sender: netfilter-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <40853577.5080803@linuxmail.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Errors-To: netfilter-admin@lists.netfilter.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Jozsef Kadlecsik Cc: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org Jozsef Kadlecsik wrote: > On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Feizhou wrote: > > >>when will ipset be available in 2.6? > > > It needs more, exhaustive testing. ippool was tested more widely than > ipset. Oh...those that mean both can actually be compiled in 2.6? > > >>I presume ippool is going to become obsolete? > > > Originally ipset was planned to be released as a new version of ippool. > Unfortunately backward compatibility could not be preserved, so a new name > had to be found. It extends ippool, yes, but that does not mean ippool is > obsolete. > Lovely. Does ippool/ipset take ips only or will they also take cidrs? BTW...mail.so-net.com.hk is an ISP smarthost...could you block so-net.com.hk not coming from 203.99.142.22 instead of a domain rule block on rdns and sender addy? And maybe all emails from 203.99.142.22 if sender addy not in so-net.com.hk...