On Thursday 2008-04-03 15:17, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Is this used by userspace? If not, why change it?
Change, because NF_ARP is used to wrongly index into xt_afinfo -- it
overlaps with PF_UNSPEC. Since NF_ARP is only used very internally in
the kernel, it can be changed. To avoid problems, PF_ARP gets a
proper slot.
and arp isn't an address family.
Neither is PF_BRIDGE, yet this is also used.
I would suggest to
just define something kernel-internally that doesn't clash,
like using AF_MAX + X as base.
Then we'd have to insert a bunch of if()s in hotpaths that
filter out the nonconformists again, or have a higher
memory footprint.
I don't like exporting this since, as you say, userspace doesn't
need it
Somehow you have to say that an extension if for arp only.
We could abuse ETH_P_ARP, but using just the same name and value
across both user and kernelspace seems just more logical.
static struct xtables_target new_arp_mangle = {
.family = ETH_P_ARP,
};
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
