Messages in this thread | | | From | Nigel Metheringham <> | Subject | Re: IP_MASQ: Difference between 2.0.31 and 2.1.x | Date | Wed, 12 Nov 1997 09:54:58 +0000 |
| |
I guess that maybe talking to the people down as IP masq maintainers might have been sensible.
There is currently some background work going on with IP Masq, but it has not been taken into the current dev kernels - this will happen when its got to some degree of usability. It has not been thought worth taking the incremental changes through into the dev kernels because they are dead end work - the new IP Masq stuff is very different and pretty much all existing code will be disposed of in the process.
If you want a justification of what went into the 2.0.x kernels, then you will find basic bug fixes around 2.0.[12] and then a slew of stuff at 2.0.30. I was asked to roll in the various additional support patches when the ISS changes went into 2.0.30. A few additional minor fixes have been added in 2.0.31. The masq mods are very minor compared to the big stuff that changed in 2.0.30. Whether the 2.0.30 changes were a good idea or not is another issue (I did suggest a 3 track kernel a long time back - stable bug fix only, incremental development, blue sky development).
Why not join the masq list or the masq development list if you are really interested. Otherwise there is always the standard Linux way - "if you want it done, code it!", just don't criticise people who have put in a load of work for not giving you everything on a plate. [Incidently, I and the company I work for have provided one hell of a lot of input into this stuff. We could have done things in other ways so that we did not feed back all our development directly into the free code tree; windging like yours sometimes makes me wonder whether other options would have been more sensible].
[Not intended to be a flame, but I think my goat was got there... :-( ]
Nigel.
-- [ Nigel.Metheringham@theplanet.net - Systems Software Engineer ] [ Tel : +44 113 251 6012 Fax : +44 113 224 0003 ] [ Real life is but a pale imitation of a Dilbert strip ]
| |