From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leonardo Rodrigues Subject: Re: simple question about state vs conntrack modules Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 14:36:05 -0200 Message-ID: <4AE1DB75.7060507@solutti.com.br> References: <4ADF844A.3090106@solutti.com.br> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed" To: ML netfilter Jozsef Kadlecsik escreveu: >> 5 Modern extensions >> De-facto obsolete extensions: >> * -m state: replaced by -m conntrack >> >> i must confess i dont recall reading about state module being obs= oleted by >> conntrack one ..... is that true ??? I know conntrack has more optio= ns .... >> but that it obsoleted state, that i dont remember .... >> =20 > > Technically the conntrack match supersedes - and so obsoletes - the s= tate=20 > match. But practically the state match is not obsoleted in any way. > =20 That's exactly what i tought ..... conntrack can offer more options= ,=20 but saying state is obsolete means, at least to me, that it's support=20 and maintenance will be dropped soon and everybody HAVE TO stop using i= t=20 and using something else. well, nice to know state is NOT obsolete the way i understand=20 something is obsoleted. thanks for your answer --=20 Atenciosamente / Sincerily, Leonardo Rodrigues Solutti Tecnologia http://www.solutti.com.br Minha armadilha de SPAM, N=C3O mandem email gertrudes@solutti.com.br My SPAMTRAP, do not email it