On Monday 2009-02-16 15:01, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: >>> >>> And the following commands to make all nodes see the same packets: >>> >>> ip maddr add 01:00:5e:00:01:01 dev eth1 >>> ip maddr add 01:00:5e:00:01:02 dev eth2 >>> arptables -I OUTPUT -o eth1 --h-length 6 \ >>> -j mangle --mangle-mac-s 01:00:5e:00:01:01 >>> arptables -I INPUT -i eth1 --h-length 6 \ >>> --destination-mac 01:00:5e:00:01:01 \ >>> -j mangle --mangle-mac-d 00:zz:yy:xx:5a:27 >> >> Mhh, is the saving of one or two characters really worth these >> deviations from the kind-of established naming scheme? Its hard >> to remember all these minor differences in my opinion. > > Hm, you mean the name "mangle" or the name of the option "--mangle-mac-d"? In case of --mangle-mac-d, getopt automatically handles abbreviations (the best example I can think of where this works is `quilt ref --s --d` for --sort --diffstat). >> Unrelated to this patch, but maybe the target would also be >> better named "NAT" instead of the much more generic term "mangle". >> Why is it using lower case letters btw? > > No idea who has done this, Lowercasing targets was the original author's (Bart De Schuymer's) deed ;-) I have nothing against lowercase targets, in fact, many a user seems to so not get case-sensitity right — “INPUT” vs. “input” (built-in chain names), “MASQUERADE” vs. “masquerade” (targets), to name some — that I would support lowercasing all targets...— if it were not for the clash between MARK (target) and mark (match), for example. Though, calling one of them “mark_m” or underscore-something to avoid the clash however, is what I dislike in favor of uppercasing target names. -- 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
