On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 13:20 +0200, ext Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Friday 2010-07-16 13:10, Luciano Coelho wrote: > >Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On Thursday 2010-04-22 13:14, Patrick McHardy wrote: > >> > >> > This looks better, thanks. A few remaining questions about things > >> > I missed previously: > >> > >> Will deal with it shortly. > > > >Are you planning to resend this patch with the changes Patrick > >suggested? > > I can try. Cool, thanks! > >As you may have seen in my earlier rfc email, I'm interested in > >something similar to the condition match. I'm not sure whether the best > >approach is to create a CONDITION target where we can set the condition > >variable in the iptables itself or if it is better to create a new > >"variable match" and an accompanying "VARIABLE target" that keeps the > >variables in memory, instead of using procfs. > > procfs is in memory :) Yes, of course, but I meant without exporting it to procfs. ;) That would probably make the code a lot simpler (actually I can't imagine a simpler match/target than a "variable" match/target ;) -- Cheers, Luca. -- 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
