Messages in this thread |  | | From | kuznet@ms2 ... | | Subject | Re: in_device.flags usage, and "tagging" interfaces | | Date | Sun, 16 May 1999 19:43:43 +0400 (MSK DST) |
| |
Hello!
> The goal would be to allow firewalling > code to react differently to packets received on a trusted interface versus > those on a hostile one, without resorting to specific device names.
Yes, the idea is good. It would solve ipchains scalability problem wrt number of devices.
> The second question is that if I wanted to implement such a feature in a > custom firewall driver (which I am considering doing), is there already a > good location to store such information? The "flags" field of the > in_device struct does not appear to be used anywhere. If this is true, are > there any plans to use this field in the future? It might be a good place > to store data like this. For example: INIF_F_TRUSTED, INIF_F_HOSTILE, > INIF_F_RDONLY, INIF_F_WRONLY, etc.
Plans are unknown. Actually, this is a stale field, which was forgotten 8)
I'd add the tag to in_device sysctl list and would not not give it a special semantics: just an integer number set by administrator via sysctl and checked by firewall module according to its own rules.
Alexey
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |