On Wednesday 2008-10-15 21:43, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > >Currently, we have tagged quite a lot of targets and matches with >AF_UNSPEC as they are generic for the netfilter supported protocols. >This is fine if we only think of ebtables, iptables and ip6tables but >not for arptables, I doubt that all those target and matches can work >with arptables - even if we still need the userspace support, of course. > >I think that we should fix those, right? That would be a tremendous amount of work, given that arptables (and ebtables too) is not quite the same codebase as iptables anymore. Most of the iptables development just went by arp and ebtables due to the nature of all these semiforks. I think we should rather focus on a truly family-independent table in the very near future. In fact I have ideas floating around that, but am stuck with how I'd exactly funnel it into reviewable patch chunks. -- 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
