![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Op do, 23-06-2005 te 07:49 +1000, schreef Herbert Xu: > Longer term though we should obsolete the ipt_physdev module. The > rationale there is that this creates a precedence that we can't > possibly maintain in a consistent way. For example, we don't have > a target that matches by hardware MAC address. If you wanted to > do that, you'd hook into the arptables interface rather than deferring > iptables after the creation of the hardware header. Iptables also sees purely bridged packets and at least for these packets the physdev module is useful and harmless. I think removing physdev alltogether is a bit drastic. I wonder what flood of messages from angry users the removal of the physdev functionality for routed packets will stirr. cheers, Bart - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-06-23 06:16 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||