On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 07:00:29 +0000, subashab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Okay, that's what I was suspecting. It'd be great if the real > > motivation for a patch was spelled out in the commit message :/ > > > > So some SoCs which run non-vanilla kernels require hacks to steal > > ports from the networking stack for use by proprietary firmware. > > > > I don't see how merging this patch benefits the community. > > This is just a transparent proxy scenario though. > We block the specific ports so that there is no unrelated traffic > belonging to host proxied here incorrectly. It's a form of one, agreed, although let's be honest - someone reading the transparent proxy use case in the commit message will not think of a complex AP scenario, but rather of a locally configured transparent proxy with IPtables or sockets or such.
